MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2148975660 · doi:10.1037/0735-7044.119.3.787

Impairing Forgetting by Preventing New Learning and Memory.

2005· article· en· W2148975660 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBehavioral Neuroscience · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMemory and Neural Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForgettingEngramNeuroscienceMemory consolidationPsychologyRecallAssociation (psychology)Associative learningCognitive psychologyHippocampus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two causes of forgetting have been promulgated: memory trace decay and retroactive interference. The authors show that forgetting is an active process requiring both new learning and memory. In the present (1)Lymnaea model system, prevention of new learning of a conflicting association, inhibition of memory consolidation, or Right Pedal Dorsal 1 soma ablation, which blocks LTM formation, are all potent means to prevent forgetting. Thus procedures that alter the ability to learn or form memory of a new conflicting aerial respiratory association prevent forgetting of a learned associative behavior. These results are the 1st demonstration in any model system that forgetting requires the soma of a single neuron.

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 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)0.000
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 score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.913

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.099
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.261 · 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