A Computational Model of Prefrontal Control in Free Recall: Strategic Memory Use in the California Verbal Learning Task
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Several decades of research into the function of the frontal lobes in brain-damaged patients, and more recently in intact individuals using function brain imaging, has delineated the complex executive functions of the frontal cortex. And yet, the mechanisms by which the brain achieves these functions remain poorly understood. Here, we present a computational model of the role of the prefrontal cortex (PFC) in controlled memory use that may help to shed light on the mechanisms underlying one aspect of frontal control: the development and deployment of recall strategies. The model accounts for interactions between the PFC and medial temporal lobe in strategic memory use. The PFC self-organizes its own mnemonic codes using internally derived performance measures. These mnemonic codes serve as retrieval cues by biasing retrieval in the medial temporal lobe memory system. We present data from three simulation experiments that demonstrate strategic encoding and retrieval in the free recall of categorized lists of words. Experiment 1 compares the performance of the model with two control networks to evaluate the contribution of various components of the model. Experiment 2 compares the performance of normal and frontally lesioned models to data from several studies using frontally intact and frontally lesioned individuals, as well as normal, healthy individuals under conditions of divided attention. Experiment 3 compares the model's performance on the recall of blocked and unblocked categorized lists of words to data from Stuss et al. (1994) for individuals with control and frontal lobe lesions. Overall, our model captures a number of aspects of human performance on free recall tasks: an increase in total words recalled and in semantic clustering scores across trials, superiority on blocked lists of related items compared to unblocked lists of related items, and similar patterns of performance across trials in the normal and frontally lesioned models, with poorer overall performance of the lesioned models on all measures. The model also has a number of shortcomings, in light of which we suggest extensions to the model that would enable more sophisticated forms of strategic control.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".