Inhibitory engrams in perception and memory
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nervous systems use excitatory cell assemblies to encode and represent sensory percepts. Similarly, synaptically connected cell assemblies or "engrams" are thought to represent memories of past experience. Multiple lines of recent evidence indicate that brain systems create and use inhibitory replicas of excitatory representations for important cognitive functions. Such matched "inhibitory engrams" can form through homeostatic potentiation of inhibition onto postsynaptic cells that show increased levels of excitation. Inhibitory engrams can reduce behavioral responses to familiar stimuli, thereby resulting in behavioral habituation. In addition, by preventing inappropriate activation of excitatory memory engrams, inhibitory engrams can make memories quiescent, stored in a latent form that is available for context-relevant activation. In neural networks with balanced excitatory and inhibitory engrams, the release of innate responses and recall of associative memories can occur through focused disinhibition. Understanding mechanisms that regulate the formation and expression of inhibitory engrams in vivo may help not only to explain key features of cognition but also to provide insight into transdiagnostic traits associated with psychiatric conditions such as autism, schizophrenia, and posttraumatic stress disorder.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 it