Modeling the influence of the hippocampal memory system on the oculomotor system
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Visual exploration is related to activity in the hippocampus (HC) and/or extended medial temporal lobe system (MTL), is influenced by stored memories, and is altered in amnesic cases. An extensive set of polysynaptic connections exists both within and between the HC and oculomotor systems such that investigating how HC responses ultimately influence neural activity in the oculomotor system, and the timing by which such neural modulation could occur, is not trivial. We leveraged TheVirtualBrain, a software platform for large-scale network simulations, to model the functional dynamics that govern the interactions between the two systems in the macaque cortex. Evoked responses following the stimulation of the MTL and some, but not all, subfields of the HC resulted in observable responses in oculomotor regions, including the frontal eye fields, within the time of a gaze fixation. Modeled lesions to some MTL regions slowed the dissipation of HC signal to oculomotor regions, whereas HC lesions generally did not affect the rapid MTL activity propagation to oculomotor regions. These findings provide a framework for investigating how information represented by the HC/MTL may influence the oculomotor system during a fixation and predict how HC lesions may affect visual exploration.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".