Eye movements support behavioral pattern completion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ability to recall a detailed event from a simple reminder is supported by pattern completion, a cognitive operation performed by the hippocampus wherein existing mnemonic representations are retrieved from incomplete input. In behavioral studies, pattern completion is often inferred through the false endorsement of lure (i.e., similar) items as old. However, evidence that such a response is due to the specific retrieval of a similar, previously encoded item is severely lacking. We used eye movement (EM) monitoring during a partial-cue recognition memory task to index reinstatement of lure images behaviorally via the recapitulation of encoding-related EMs or gaze reinstatement. Participants reinstated encoding-related EMs following degraded retrieval cues and this reinstatement was negatively correlated with accuracy for lure images, suggesting that retrieval of existing representations (i.e., pattern completion) underlies lure false alarms. Our findings provide evidence linking gaze reinstatement and pattern completion and advance a functional role for EMs in 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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".