A complex associative structure formed in the mammalian brain during acquisition of a simple visual discrimination task: Dorsolateral striatum, amygdala, and hippocampus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A review of empirical evidence supporting the multiple memory systems view of the organization of learning and memory in the mammalian brain is presented as a powerful component of a broader foundation of basic scientific information necessary for understanding human behavior. However, it is argued that there are significant gaps in our knowledge about these different learning and memory systems, how they interact with one another, and how they interact with the rest of the brain. To demonstrate how little we know about these complex processes, this article reviews recent evidence showing the complexity of associative structure formed during the acquisition of a simple visual discrimination task. The results show that the dorsolateral striatum is necessary for the acquisition of this task but that both the amygdala and hippocampus incidentally acquire and store information during this training period. A new experiment is also presented showing that rats with complete or partial (dorsal vs. ventral) hippocampal lesions show a retrograde amnesic effect on the simple visual discrimination task despite the fact that these same lesions produce no impairment in the anterograde direction. Evidence is presented in support of one interpretation of this effect suggesting that the retrograde amnesia occurs, at least in part, because the hippocampus acquires a context-specific inhibitory association during original training. Although this representation is not required for acquisition of the task in the anterograde direction, removal of this representation has a disruptive effect on expression of the task.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
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".