Prefrontal and Hippocampal Structure Predict Statistical Learning Ability in Early Childhood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Statistical learning can be used to gain sensitivity to many important regularities in our environment, including structure that is foundational to language and visual perception. As yet, little is known about how statistical learning takes place in the human brain, especially in children's developing brains and with regard to the broader neurobiology of learning and memory. We therefore explored the relationship between statistical learning and the thickness and volume of structures that are traditionally implicated in declarative and procedural memory, focusing specifically on the left inferior PFC, the hippocampus, and the caudate during early childhood (ages 5-8.5 years). We found that the thickness of the left inferior frontal cortex and volume of the right hippocampus predicted statistical learning ability in young children. Importantly, these regions did not change in thickness or volume with age, but the relationship between learning and the right hippocampus interacted with age such that older children's hippocampal structure more strongly predicted performance. Overall, the data show that children's statistical learning is supported by multiple neural structures that are more broadly implicated in learning and memory, especially declarative memory (hippocampus) and attention/top-down control (the PFC).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".