Unreinforced spatial (latent) learning is mediated by a circuit that includes dorsal entorhinal cortex and fimbria fornix
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The relationship of the entorhinal cortex (EC) and fimbria-fornix (FF) in unreinforced spatial (latent) learning was studied using the conditioned-cue-preference task on an eight-arm radial maze. The maze was turned before every trial to eliminate the use of local cues. During three pre-exposure sessions, food-deprived rats explored the center platform and two adjacent arms of the maze. Since most of the same cues were visible from both arm locations, discriminating them required spatial learning. The rats were then alternately confined to the end of each arm over several days: one arm always contained food, the other was empty. Finally, the rats were allowed free access to both arms with no food present. Normal rats spent more time in their food-paired than in their unpaired arms showing that they learned to discriminate between the arm locations. Bilateral micro-injections of muscimol into the dorsal, but not into the ventral EC, given before the pre-exposure sessions only, impaired the discrimination. The discrimination was also impaired in rats with unilateral lesions of FF and contralateral injections of muscimol into the dorsal EC given before the pre-exposure sessions. Ipsilateral FF lesions and entorhinal inactivation had no effect. These results indicate that the acquisition of information during unreinforced exploration of a novel environment requires an intact circuit involving the dorsal EC and fimbria fornix. Together with previous reports, that this form of learning does not require a functional hippocampus, (Gaskin et al. (2005) Hippocampus 15:1085-1093) the findings also suggest that the acquisition of certain kinds of unreinforced information by this circuit is independent of the hippocampus.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".