A context‐specific single contingent‐reinforcing stimulus boosts intermediate‐term memory into long‐term memory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Following operant conditioning of aerial respiration in Lymnaea, memory forms. Depending on the training procedure either intermediate memory (ITM, < 3 h) or long-term memory (LTM, > 6 h) results. ITM is dependent on de novo protein synthesis whilst LTM is dependent on both transcription and de novo protein synthesis. LTM formation requires the soma of RPeD1 (one of the central pattern generator neurons) to be present. Following activation of a memory, it re-enters a labile state and undergoes a reconsolidation process to restabilize it. During reconsolidation, memory may be updated and/or changed. We add here another consequence of memory reactivation: a single contingent-reinforcing stimulus (SCRS), given in the same context as previous ITM training, boosts a residual memory trace to LTM. Separate cohorts of snails first received the ITM training procedure. In the cohort that received the SCRS 24 h after the last ITM training session, LTM was observed on the following day. LTM was not observed in cohorts that were: (i) given a single noncontingent stimulus; (ii) given the SCRS in a context other than the ITM training; (iii) given a 48-h gap between the last ITM training session and the context-specific SCRS; (iv) cooled immediately after the last ITM training session; (v) cooled immediately after the delivery of the context-specific SCRS; (vi) had the soma of RPeD1 ablated before the presentation of the context-specific SCRS; (vii) received a yoked control procedure. These data lead us to conclude that the context-specific SCRS reactivates a residual molecular memory trace in RPeD1 and boosts it into becoming the substrate for LTM.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".