Hippocampal complex and retrieval of recent and very remote autobiographical memories: Evidence from functional magnetic resonance imaging in neurologically intact people
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It has been argued that the role of the hippocampus in memory is time-limited: during a period of memory consolidation, other brain regions such as the neocortex are said to acquire the ability to support memory retention and retrieval on their own. An alternative view is that retention and retrieval of memory for autobiographical episodes depend on the hippocampal complex, regardless of the age of the memory. We examined the participation of the hippocampal complex in a functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) study in which participants were asked to recollect autobiographical events that occurred either within the last 4 years or more than 20 years ago. We found equivalent levels of hippocampal activation in both conditions in all participants (N = 10). In addition, activation in neocortical regions did not differ as a function of the age of the memory, even though most of the recent memories recalled were less than 2 years old and the remote memories more than 35 years old. The results support the notion that the hippocampal complex participates in retention and recovery of even very old autobiographical memories, and place boundary conditions on theories of memory consolidation.
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.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it