Interaction between Neurogenesis and Hippocampal Memory System: New Vistas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
During the last decade, the questions on the functionality of adult neurogenesis have changed their emphasis from if to how the adult-born neurons participate in a variety of memory processes. The emerging answers are complex because we are overwhelmed by a variety of behavioral tasks that apparently require new neurons to be performed optimally. With few exceptions, the hippocampal memory system seems to use the newly generated neurons for multiple roles. Adult neurogenesis has given the dentate gyrus new capabilities not previously thought possible within the scope of traditional synaptic plasticity. Looking at these new developments from the perspective of past discoveries, the science of adult neurogenesis has emerged from its initial phase of being, first, a surprising oddity and, later, exciting possibility, to the present state of being an integral part of mainstream neuroscience. The answers to many remaining questions regarding adult neurogenesis will come along only with our growing understanding of the functionality of the brain as a whole. This, in turn, will require integration of multiple levels of organization from molecules and cells to circuits and systems, ultimately resulting in comprehension of behavioral outcomes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".