MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2005173683 · doi:10.1093/cercor/bhm172

Dopamine Modulation of Hippocampal-Prefrontal Cortical Interaction Drives Memory-Guided Behavior

2007· article· en· W2005173683 on OpenAlexafffund
Yukiori Goto, Anthony A. Grace

Bibliographic record

VenueCerebral Cortex · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMemory and Neural Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNational Institute of Mental HealthMcGill University
KeywordsPrefrontal cortexNeuroscienceRetrospective memoryHippocampusEpisodic memoryPsychologyMechanism (biology)Computer scienceProspective memoryCognitive psychologyExplicit memoryCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Information gleaned from learning and memory processes is essential in guiding behavior toward a specific goal. However, the neural mechanisms that determine how these processes are effectively utilized to guide goal-directed behavior are unknown. Here, we show that rats utilize retrospective and prospective memory and flexible switching between these 2 memory processes to guide behaviors to obtain rewards. We found that retrospective memory is mainly processed in the hippocampus (HPC) but that this retrospective information must be incorporated within the prefrontal cortex (PFC) to be used to switch to an anticipatory response strategy involving prospective memory. Furthermore, switching between memory processes is regulated by the mesocortical dopamine (DA) system. Thus, DA D1 and D2 receptor activation in the PFC differentially affects retrospective memory processing within the HPC via an indirect feedback pathway. In contrast, D1, but not D2, receptor activation is crucial for incorporation of HPC-based retrospective information into the PFC. However, once this takes place, D2 receptor activation is required for further processing of information to effect preparation of future actions. These results provide a unique perspective on the mechanism of memory-based goal-directed behavior.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.127
Threshold uncertainty score0.709

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations106
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCerebral CortexSame topicMemory and Neural MechanismsFrench-language works237,207