MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Reactivation of Rate Remapping in CA3

2016· article· en· W2508654816 on OpenAlexafffund
C. Daniela Schwindel, Zaneta Navratilova, Karim Ali, Masami Tatsuno, Bruce L. McNaughton

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMemory and Neural Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaVlaamse regeringAlberta Innovates
KeywordsNeurosciencePsychologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

UNLABELLED: The hippocampus is thought to contribute to episodic memory by creating, storing, and reactivating patterns that are unique to each experience, including different experiences that happen at the same location. Hippocampus can combine spatial and contextual/episodic information using a dual coding scheme known as "global" and "rate" remapping. Global remapping selects which set of neurons can activate at a given location. Rate remapping readjusts the firing rates of this set depending on current experience, thus expressing experience-unique patterns at each location. But can the experience-unique component be retrieved spontaneously? Whereas reactivation of recent, spatially selective patterns in hippocampus is well established, it is never perfect, raising the issue of whether the experiential component might be absent. This question is key to the hypothesis that hippocampus can assist memory consolidation by reactivating and broadcasting experience-specific "index codes" to neocortex. In CA3, global remapping exhibits attractor-like dynamics, whereas rate remapping apparently does not, leading to the hypothesis that only the former can be retrieved associatively and casting doubt on the general consolidation hypothesis. Therefore, we studied whether the rate component is reactivated spontaneously during sleep. We conducted neural ensemble recordings from CA3 while rats ran on a circular track in different directions (in different sessions) and while they slept. It was shown previously that the two directions of running result in strong rate remapping. During sleep, the most recent rate distribution was reactivated preferentially. Therefore, CA3 can retrieve patterns spontaneously that are unique to both the location and the content of recent experience. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: The hippocampus is required for memory of events and their spatial contexts. The primary correlate of hippocampal activity is location in space, but multiple memories can occur in the same location. To be useful for distinguishing these memories, the hippocampus must be able, not only to express, but also to retrieve both spatial and nonspatial information about events. Whether it can retrieve nonspatial information has been challenged recently. We exposed rats to two different experiences (running in different directions) in the same locations and showed that even the nonspatial components of hippocampal cell firing are reactivated spontaneously during sleep, supporting the conclusion that both types of information about a recent experience can be retrieved.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.151
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.181 · 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 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

Citations17
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeuroscienceSame topicMemory and Neural MechanismsFrench-language works237,207