High‐resolution investigation of memory‐specific reinstatement in the hippocampus and perirhinal cortex
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Episodic memory involves remembering the details that characterize a prior experience. Successful memory recovery has been associated with the reinstatement of brain activity patterns in a number of sensory regions across the cortex. However, how the hippocampus and surrounding medial temporal lobe (MTL) cortex contribute to this process is less clear. Models of episodic memory posit that hippocampal pattern reinstatement, also referred to as pattern completion, may mediate cortical reinstatement during retrieval. Empirical evidence of this process, however, remains elusive. Here, we use high-resolution fMRI and encoding-retrieval multi-voxel pattern similarity analyses to demonstrate for the first time that the hippocampus, particularly right hippocampal subfield CA1, shows evidence of reinstating individual episodic memories. Furthermore, reinstatement in perirhinal cortex (PrC) is also evident. Critically, we identify distinct factors that may mediate the cortical reinstatement in PrC. First, we find that encoding activation in PrC is related to later reinstatement in this region, consistent with the theory that encoding strength in the regions that process the memoranda is important for later reinstatement. Conversely, retrieval activation in right CA1 was correlated with reinstatement in PrC, consistent with models of pattern completion. This dissociation is discussed in the context of the flow of information into and out of the hippocampus during encoding and retrieval, respectively. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".