MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Temporal Expectation Modulates the Cortical Dynamics of Short-Term Memory

2018· article· en· W2883076886 on OpenAlexaff
Anna Wilsch, Molly J. Henry, Björn Herrmann, Christoph S. Herrmann, Jonas Obleser

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeuroscienceSupramarginal gyrusPsychologyAlpha (finance)Functional magnetic resonance imagingDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Increased memory load is often signified by enhanced neural oscillatory power in the alpha range (8-13 Hz), which is taken to reflect inhibition of task-irrelevant brain regions. The corresponding neural correlates of memory decay, however, are not yet well understood. In the current study, we investigated auditory short-term memory decay in humans using a delayed matching-to-sample task with pure-tone sequences. First, in a behavioral experiment, we modeled memory performance over six different delay-phase durations. Second, in a MEG experiment, we assessed alpha-power modulations over three different delay-phase durations. In both experiments, the temporal expectation for the to-be-remembered sound was manipulated so that it was either temporally expected or not. In both studies, memory performance declined over time, but this decline was weaker when the onset time of the to-be-remembered sound was expected. Similarly, patterns of alpha power in and alpha-tuned connectivity between sensory cortices changed parametrically with delay duration (i.e., decrease in occipitoparietal regions, increase in temporal regions). Temporal expectation not only counteracted alpha-power decline in heteromodal brain areas (i.e., supramarginal gyrus), but also had a beneficial effect on memory decay, counteracting memory performance decline. Correspondingly, temporal expectation also boosted alpha connectivity within attention networks known to play an active role during memory maintenance. The present data show how patterns of alpha power orchestrate short-term memory decay and encourage a more nuanced perspective on alpha power across brain space and time beyond its inhibitory role.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.569
Threshold uncertainty score0.296

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Citations20
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeuroscienceSame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207