Three-chamber Social Approach Task with Optogenetic Stimulation (Mice)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The formation of social relationships via social interactions and memory are essential for one's physical and mental health. To date, rodent studies have used the three-chamber social approach test to measure social approach, social novelty, and social memory. In recent years, techniques including optogenetics have been developed to acutely control the activity of genetically defined populations of neurons. Recent studies have even combined optogenetics with advanced temporal gene expression control systems to label certain populations of neurons during learning and subsequently reactivated for memory testing. We combined optogenetic targeting with the three-chamber social approach test to examine particular neural circuits of interest during social memory encoding or retrieval. First, we stereotaxically infected specific brain areas with viral-encoding opsins that acutely activate or inhibit the firing of the neurons. Next, we subjected the mice to the three-chamber behavioral paradigm while delivering light during social memory encoding or retrieval. Lastly, the mice were tested with the delivery of light in a counter-balanced manner which allows each subject to be its own internal control. Thus, the optogenetic stimulation coupled with the three-chamber social approach test is a well-validated paradigm to explore the contribution of diverse brain circuits in various social cognition processes.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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".