MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2418549551 · doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2016.05.021

Enhancing Prefrontal Neuron Activity Enables Associative Learning of Temporally Disparate Events

2016· article· en· W2418549551 on OpenAlexafffund
Julien Volle, Xiaotian Yu, Huaying Sun, Stephanie E. Tanninen, Nathan Insel, Kaori Takehara‐Nishiuchi

Bibliographic record

VenueCell Reports · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsPrefrontal cortexNeuroscienceExcitatory postsynaptic potentialNeuronPsychologyAssociative learningAssociative propertyCognitive psychologyCognitionInhibitory postsynaptic potential

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ability to link events that are separated in time is important for extracting meaning from experiences and guiding behavior in the future. This ability likely requires the brain to continue representing events even after they have passed, a process that may involve the prefrontal cortex and takes the form of sustained, event-specific neuron activity. Here, we show that experimentally increasing the activity of excitatory neurons in the medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) enables rats to associate two stimuli separated by a 750-ms long temporal gap. Learning is accompanied by ramping increases in prefrontal theta and beta rhythms during the interval between stimuli. This ramping activity predicts memory-related behavioral responses on a trial-by-trial basis but is not correlated with the same muscular activity during non-memory conditions. Thus, the enhancement of prefrontal neuron excitability extends the time course of evoked prefrontal network activation and facilitates the formation of associations of temporally disparate, but correlated, events.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.520

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations22
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCell ReportsSame topicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchFrench-language works237,207