Reduced Cortical Motor Potentials Underlie Reductions in Memory-Guided Reaching Performance
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
We used the event-related potential (ERP) methodology to examine differences in neural processing between visually and memory-guided reaches. Consistent with previous findings (e.g., Westwood, Heath, & Roy, 2003), memory-guided reaches undershot veridical target location to a greater extent than their visually guided counterparts. Analysis of the ERP data revealed that memory-guided reaches were associated with reduced potentials over medial-frontal cortex at target presentation and following movement onset. Further, we found that the amplitudes of the potentials over medial-frontal cortex for visually and memory-guided reaches were significantly correlated with the peak accelerations and decelerations of the reaching movements. Our results suggest that memory-guided reaches are mediated by a motor plan that is generated while a target is visible, and then stored in memory until needed--a result counter to recent behavioral theories asserting that memory-guided reaches are planned just before movement onset via a stored, sensory-based target representation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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