MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2586237337 · doi:10.1523/eneuro.0330-16.2017

Caudal Nucleus Accumbens Core Is Critical in the Regulation of Cue-Elicited Approach-Avoidance Decisions

2017· article· en· W2586237337 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueeNeuro · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersGovernment of Canada
KeywordsMuscimolNucleus accumbensPsychologyNeuroscienceConditioned place preferenceConditioningBasal gangliaVentral pallidumValence (chemistry)Avoidance learningGABAA receptorCentral nervous systemReceptorAddictionChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The nucleus accumbens (NAc) is thought to be a site of integration of positively and negatively valenced information and action selection. Functional differentiation in valence processing has previously been found along the rostrocaudal axis of the shell region of the NAc in assessments of unconditioned motivation. Given that the core region of the NAc has been implicated in the elicitation of motivated behavior in response to conditioned cues, we sought to assess the role of caudal, intermediate, and rostral sites within this subregion in cue-elicited approach-avoidance decisions. Rats were trained to associate visuo-tactile cues with appetitive, aversive, and neutral outcomes. Following the successful acquisition of the cue-outcome associations, rats received microinfusions of GABA A and GABA B receptor agonists (muscimol/baclofen) or saline into the caudal, intermediate, or rostral NAc core and were then exposed to a superimposition of appetitively and aversively valenced cues versus neutral cues in a “conflict test,” as well as to the appetitive versus neutral cues, and aversive cues versus neutral cues, in separate conditioned preference/avoidance tests. Disruption of activity in the intermediate to caudal parts of the NAc core resulted in a robust avoidance bias in response to motivationally conflicting cues, as well as a potentiated avoidance of aversive cues as compared with control animals, coupled with an attenuated conditioned preference for the appetitive cue. These results suggest that the caudal NAc core may have the capacity to exert bidirectional control over appetitively and aversively motivated responses to valence signals.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.569
Threshold uncertainty score0.596

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.147
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.229 · 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