Bibliographic record
Abstract
There has recently been an increase in interest in the effects of visual interference on memory processing, with the aim of elucidating the role of the perirhinal cortex (PRC) in recognition memory. One view argues that the PRC processes highly complex conjunctions of object features, and recent evidence from rodents suggests that these representations may be vital for buffering against the effects of pre-retrieval interference on object recognition memory. To investigate whether PRC-dependent object representations play a similar role in humans, we used functional magnetic resonance imaging to scan neurologically healthy participants while they performed a novel interference-match-to-sample task. This paradigm was specifically designed to concurrently assess the impact of object versus spatial interference, on recognition memory for objects or scenes, while keeping constant the amount of object and scene information presented across all trials. Activity at retrieval was examined, within an anatomically defined PRC region of interest, according to the demand for object or scene memory, following a period of object compared with spatial interference. Critically, we found greater PRC activity for object memory following object interference, compared with object memory following scene interference, and no difference between object and scene interference for scene recognition. These data demonstrate a role for the human PRC during object recognition memory, following a period of object, but not scene interference, and emphasize the importance of representational content to mnemonic processing.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".