MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Reversible lesions of the rhinal cortex produce delayed non-matching-to-sample deficits in rats

2000· article· en· W2094627096 on OpenAlexaff
Steven J. Barnes, Stan Floresco, Tom J. Kornecook, John P. J. Pinel

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroreport · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMemory and Neural Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityDouglas Mental Health University InstituteUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeurosciencePsychologyCortex (anatomy)LidocaineCerebral cortexHippocampusLimbic systemCentral nervous system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rats with cannulae guides implanted in the rhinal cortex were tested on a delayed non-matching-to-sample task, following either lidocaine or sham microinfusions. Bilateral lidocaine microinfusions to the rhinal cortex produced significant delayed non-matching-to-sample deficits. These results are consistent with the putative role of the rhinal cortex in object recognition but because the deficits were not shown to be time dependent, non-mnemonic interpretations cannot be ruled out. These results also illustrate the utility of reversible lidocaine lesions in the study of the neuroanatomical basis of delayed non-matching-to-sample.

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)0.001
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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.531

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations17
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuroreportSame topicMemory and Neural MechanismsFrench-language works237,207