MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2312194412 · doi:10.1093/cercor/bhw047

Effects of Prior-Knowledge on Brain Activation and Connectivity During Associative Memory Encoding

2016· article· en· W2312194412 on OpenAlexafffund
Zhong‐Xu Liu, Cheryl L. Grady, Morris Moscovitch

Bibliographic record

VenueCerebral Cortex · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMemory and Neural Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoBaycrest Hospital
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPsychologySemantic memoryEpisodic memoryCognitionAssociative propertyFunctional magnetic resonance imagingContent-addressable memoryVentromedial prefrontal cortexCognitive psychologyPerceptionEncoding (memory)NeuroscienceFusiform face areaHuman brainHippocampusPrefrontal cortexFace perceptionComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Forming new associations is a fundamental process of building our knowledge system. At the brain level, how prior-knowledge influences acquisition of novel associations has not been thoroughly investigated. Based on recent cognitive neuroscience literature on multiple-component memory processing, we hypothesize that prior-knowledge triggers additional evaluative, semantic, or episodic-binding processes, mainly supported by the ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC), anterior temporal pole (aTPL), and hippocampus (HPC), to facilitate new memory encoding. To test this hypothesis, we scanned 20 human participants with functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) while they associated novel houses with famous or nonfamous faces. Behaviorally, we found beneficial effects of prior-knowledge on associative memory. At the brain level, we found that the vmPFC and HPC, as well as the parahippocampal place area (PPA) and fusiform face area, showed stronger activation when famous faces were involved. The vmPFC, aTPL, HPC, and PPA also exhibited stronger activation when famous faces elicited stronger emotions and memories, and when associations were later recollected. Connectivity analyses also suggested that HPC connectivity with the vmPFC plays a more important role in the famous than nonfamous condition. Taken together, our results suggest that prior-knowledge facilitates new associative encoding by recruiting additional perceptual, evaluative, or associative binding processes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.250 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations128
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCerebral CortexSame topicMemory and Neural MechanismsFrench-language works237,207