The Teco Theory and Lawful Dependency in Successive Episodic Memory Tests
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
A large number of experiments in successive tests of episodic memory have focused on an experimental paradigm called recognition failure of recallable words. In this paradigm, a cued recall test follows a recognition test. Large amounts of data have revealed a lawful moderate dependence between recognition and cued recall. TECO (Sikström, 1996b), a general connectionist theory of memory, has been applied for the phenomenon of recognition failure. This paper makes a strong claim that all possible pairwise combinations of successive tests between recognition, cued recognition, cued recall, and free recall follow a lawful relationship. The quantitative degree of the dependency predicted between these tests can be summarized in one function. Four experiments were conducted to test this claim. In line with the predictions, the results show that all pairwise combinations of these tests fit reasonably well with the proposed function. The TECO theory suggests theoretical insights into how recognition and recall may be divided into a recollection component, a familiarity component, and a cue-target integration component.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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