MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2070943859 · doi:10.2466/pr0.2001.88.1.102

Normalization of Spatial Learning despite Brain Damage in Rats Receiving Ketamine after Seizure-Induction: Evidence for the Neuromatrix

2001· article· en· W2070943859 on OpenAlexaff
L. N. Vaillancourt, Michael A. Persinger

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychological Reports · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMemory and Neural Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeurosciencePsychologyHippocampusKetaminePilocarpineEpilepsyThalamus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The concept of the neuromatrix assumes that all behaviours are associated with complex spatiotemporal electromagnetic fields within the brain. The same complex magnetic field can be supported potentially by different mosaics of neuronal associations and result in the same behaviours. In the present study the accuracy of long-term and short-term spatial memory for rats that had been treated with 100 mg/kg of ketamine immediately after the induction of seizures by lithium and pilocarpine did not differ from normal rats despite the conspicuous multifocal neuronal loss. A 30-min. delay of treatment with ketamine resulted in significant memory impairment. Whereas deficits in short-term memory were significantly correlated with cell loss within the CA field of the hippocampus, deficits in long-term memory were related to cell loss within specific thalamic-amygdaloid structures. Implications for the concept of the neuromatrix, if valid, are discussed.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.197
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations12
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychological ReportsSame topicMemory and Neural MechanismsFrench-language works237,207