Context Learning and the Effect of Context on Memory Retrieval in <i>Lymnaea</i>
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
Aerial respiratory behavior in Lymnaea was operantly conditioned so that the animals perform aerial respiration significantly less often. Using the standard training procedure (pond water made hypoxic by bubbling N2 through it) both food-deprived and fed animals learned and exhibited long-term memory (LTM). However, food-deprived animals exhibited neither learning nor memory when trained under a condition in which the hypoxic pond water also contained a food odorant (carrot, the food-odorant procedure). Fed animals, however, learned and exhibited LTM with the food-odorant procedure. Thus, the presence of the food odorant per se did not prevent learning or the establishment of LTM. Further experimentation, however, revealed that the ability of the snails to have recall (i.e., memory) for the learned behavior was dependent on the context in which memory was tested. That is, if animals were trained with the food-odorant procedure they could only exhibit recall if tested in the food-odorant context and vice versa with the standard training procedure. Thus, although fed animals could learn and show LTM with either training and testing procedure, LTM could only be seen when they were tested in the context in which they were trained.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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