MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2951802987 · doi:10.1002/hipo.23009

Changes in patterns of neural activity underlie a time‐dependent transformation of memory in rats and humans

2018· article· en· W2951802987 on OpenAlexafffund
Melanie J. Sekeres, Gordon Winocur, Morris Moscovitch, John A. E. Anderson, Sara Pishdadian, J. Martin Wojtowicz, Marie St‐Laurent, Mary Pat McAndrews, Cheryl L. Grady

Bibliographic record

VenueHippocampus · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMemory and Neural Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkTrent UniversityBaycrest HospitalYork UniversityUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsNeuroscienceMemory consolidationEpisodic memoryHippocampusNeocortexPsychologyEngramLong-term memoryPrefrontal cortexHippocampal formationContext (archaeology)Semantic memoryNeuroanatomy of memoryExplicit memoryCognitionBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The dynamic process of memory consolidation involves a reorganization of brain regions that support a memory trace over time, but exactly how the network reorganizes as the memory changes remains unclear. We present novel converging evidence from studies of animals (rats) and humans for the time-dependent reorganization and transformation of different types of memory as measured both by behavior and brain activation. We find that context-specific memories in rats, and naturalistic episodic memories in humans, lose precision over time and activity in the hippocampus decreases. If, however, the retrieved memories retain contextual or perceptual detail, the hippocampus is engaged similarly at recent and remote timepoints. As the interval between the timepoint increases, the medial prefrontal cortex is engaged increasingly during memory retrieval, regardless of the context or the amount of retrieved detail. Moreover, these hippocampal-frontal shifts are accompanied by corresponding changes in a network of cortical structures mediating perceptually-detailed as well as less precise, schematic memories. These findings provide cross-species evidence for the crucial interplay between hippocampus and neocortex that reflects changes in memory representation over time and underlies systems consolidation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations99
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHippocampusSame topicMemory and Neural MechanismsFrench-language works237,207