MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Site of a Motor Memory Shifts with Consolidation

2005· article· en· W1985676896 on OpenAlexafffund
Charles D. Kassardjian, Yao‐Fang Tan, Ji-Yeon J. Chung, Raquel Heskin, Michael J. Peterson, Dianne M. Broussard

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVestibular and auditory disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsCNQXNeuroscienceMemory consolidationConsolidation (business)CerebellumMotor learningPsychologyMotor cortexReflexExcitatory postsynaptic potentialInhibitory postsynaptic potentialGlutamate receptorChemistryAMPA receptorHippocampusStimulationReceptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The basis for the consolidation of memory is a controversial topic, particularly in the case of motor memory. One view is that motor memory is transferred, partially or completely, to a new location during the consolidation process ("systems consolidation"). We investigated this possibility in a primitive motor system, the vestibulo-ocular reflex (VOR). In the simple circuitry of the VOR, there are relatively few possible storage sites for memory. We partially blocked excitatory neurotransmission in the cerebellar cortex of cats with the glutamate antagonist 6-cyano-7-nitroquinoxaline-2,3-dione (CNQX). If CNQX was injected immediately after 60 min of rotation under conditions that induced a learned decrease in the gain of the VOR, gain was returned to its baseline value. Expression of the new memory could also be disrupted by rotation in darkness, suggesting that consolidation had not taken place; however, after learning had continued for 3 d, expression of the learned change was diminished only slightly by blockade and was unaffected by rotation in darkness. Our interpretation of these results is that learning may take place initially in the cerebellar cortex and that during consolidation, motor memories are converted to a more distributed representation that includes the cerebellar cortex and another site.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.238 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations165
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeuroscienceSame topicVestibular and auditory disordersFrench-language works237,207