The Site of a Motor Memory Shifts with Consolidation
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
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it