Damage to the Hippocampal Formation Does Not Disrupt Representational Flexibility as Measured by a Novelty Transfer Test.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rats were trained on a set of visual discrimination problems (A+B-, C+D-, E+F-). The choice stimuli were then recombined to create novel combination tests (A+D-, C+F-, E+B-). Rats with damage to the hippocampus showed perfect transfer on these tests, always choosing A, C, and E, but were not able to learn the spatial location of the platform, indicating that damage to the hippocampus was functional. These results question the generality of H. Eichenbaum, P. Mathews, and N. J. Cohen's (1989) findings and the theoretical claim that choice behavior with novel combinations is based on inferential-like hippocampus-dependent processes (H. Eichenbaum, 1992). They are consistent with the view that simple associative processes guide choice behavior in animals with hippocampal damage that are confronted with novel combinations.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".