Remembering Our Past: Functional Neuroanatomy of Recollection of Recent and Very Remote Personal Events
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Functional magnetic resonance imaging was used to study brain regions implicated in retrieval of memories that are decades old. To probe autobiographical memory, family photographs were selected by confederates without the participant's involvement, thereby eliminating many of the variables that potentially confounded previous neuroimaging studies. We found that context-rich memories were associated with activity in lingual and precuneus gyri independently of their age. By contrast, retrosplenial cortex was more active for recent events regardless of memory vividness. Hippocampal activation was related to the richness of re-experiencing (vividness) rather than the age of the memory per se. Remote memories were associated with distributed activation along the rostrocaudal axis of the hippocampus whereas activation associated with recent memories was clustered in the anterior portion. This may explain why circumscribed lesions to the hippocampus disproportionately affect recent memories. These findings are incompatible with theories of long-term memory consolidation, and are more easily accommodated by multiple-trace theory, which posits that detailed memories are always dependent on 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.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it