MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Precuneus stimulation alters the neural dynamics of autobiographical memory retrieval

2020· article· en· W3001536891 on OpenAlexafffund
Melissa Hebscher, Christine Ibrahim, Asaf Gilboa

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroImage · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMemory and Neural Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkBaycrest HospitalToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPrecuneusRetrosplenial cortexPsychologyAutobiographical memoryNeuroscienceSemantic memoryBrain stimulationMagnetoencephalographyCognitive psychologyHippocampusRecallStimulationElectroencephalographyCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Autobiographical memory (AM) unfolds over time, but little is known about the dynamics of its retrieval. Space-based models of memory implicate the hippocampus, retrosplenial cortex, and precuneus in early memory computations. Here we used transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) and magnetoencephalography (MEG) to investigate the causal role of the precuneus in the dynamics of AM retrieval. During early memory search and construction, precuneus stimulation compared to vertex stimulation led to delayed evoked neural activity within 1000 ​ms after cue presentation. During later memory elaboration, stimulation led to decreased sustained positivity. We further identified a parietal late positive component during memory elaboration, the amplitude of which was associated with spatial perspective during recollection. This association was disrupted following precuneus stimulation, suggesting that this region plays an important role in the neural representation of spatial perspective during AM. These findings demonstrate a causal role for the precuneus in early AM retrieval, during memory search before a specific memory is accessed, and in spatial context reinstatement during the initial stages of memory elaboration and re-experiencing. By utilizing the high temporal resolution of MEG and the causality of TMS, this study helps clarify the neural correlates of early naturalistic memory retrieval.

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 score0.216
Threshold uncertainty score0.538

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Citations70
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuroImageSame topicMemory and Neural MechanismsFrench-language works237,207