Alzheimer’s disease and memory strength: Gradual decline of memory traces as a function of their strength
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Episodic memory impairment is at the core of amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI) and Alzheimer's disease (AD). The origin of memory deficits may result either from an encoding deficit or from an accelerated decline of the memory trace. The present study explores these two hypotheses. METHOD: We used the delayed-matching-to sample 48 items (DMS-48) memory test in a group of controls, aMCI patients, and AD patients (n= 16 in each group). The DMS-48 offers an incidental learning phase followed by three forced-choice recognition tests at three-minute, one-hour, and one-week delays. Moreover, the forced-choice test distinguishes three kinds of couple items: abstract (meaningless), paired (two similar exemplars), and unique (two different objects) items. RESULTS: As predicted by the accelerated forgetting hypothesis, patients showed a decrease in recognition performance over time. Controls also exhibited a similar decline in performance. As predicted by the encoding deficit hypothesis, abstract items were the most poorly recognized in AD, at both the three-minute and the one-week delays. In AD, recognition of the paired items also dropped after the one-hour delay, followed by unique items after a one-week delay. Patients with aMCI exhibited a performance that was similar to controls, except for abstract items, which dropped at the one-week delay. CONCLUSIONS: These results are discussed in light of a third hypothesis, the memory strength hypothesis, in order to better account for the progressive decline in memory performance as a function of the item type in AD.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".