Restricting Visual Exploration Directly Impedes Neural Activity, Functional Connectivity, and Memory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We move our eyes to explore the visual world, extract information, and create memories. The number of gaze fixations-the stops that the eyes make-has been shown to correlate with activity in the hippocampus, a region critical for memory, and with later recognition memory. Here, we combined eyetracking with fMRI to provide direct evidence for the relationships between gaze fixations, neural activity, and memory during scene viewing. Compared to free viewing, fixating a single location reduced: 1) subsequent memory, 2) neural activity along the ventral visual stream into the hippocampus, 3) neural similarity between effects of subsequent memory and visual exploration, and 4) functional connectivity among the hippocampus, parahippocampal place area, and other cortical regions. Gaze fixations were uniquely related to hippocampal activity, even after controlling for neural effects due to subsequent memory. Therefore, this study provides key causal evidence supporting the notion that the oculomotor and memory systems are intrinsically related at both the behavioral and neural level. Individual gaze fixations may provide the basic unit of information on which memory binding processes operate.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".