MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Spatial conditional associative learning: effects of thalamo-hippocampal disconnection in rats

2004· article· en· W1987767312 on OpenAlexaff
Jessica Henry, Michael Petrides, Marie St‐Laurent, Viviane Sziklas

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroreport · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMemory and Neural Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeuroscienceHippocampusHippocampal formationSpatial memoryPsychologyContext (archaeology)Spatial learningAssociative learningDisconnectionThalamusCognitive psychologyWorking memoryCognitionBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Unilateral lesions to the anterior thalamic nuclei (ATN) and the hippocampus (H) were made in opposite hemispheres in the rat to examine whether these brain structures form part of a functional neural pathway underlying spatial learning and memory. In the first experiment, rats were tested on a spatial-visual conditional associative task in which they had to learn to approach one of two stimuli depending on the spatial context in which the stimuli were embedded. The rats were subsequently trained on delayed forced alternation, a spatial working memory task known to be sensitive to the effects of ATNxH damage. Rats with ATNxH lesions were impaired in the acquisition of both tasks in comparison with normal control animals. The findings support the idea that the anterior thalamic nuclei and the hippocampus are critical components of an anatomical system subserving spatial memory and suggest that these brain regions work in a dependent fashion during the performance of certain spatial learning tasks.

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)0.000
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.259 · 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

Citations63
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuroreportSame topicMemory and Neural MechanismsFrench-language works237,207