MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3123628937 · doi:10.1080/01677063.2020.1833009

But can they learn? My accidental discovery of learning and memory in <i>C. elegans</i>

2020· article· en· W3123628937 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurogenetics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetics, Aging, and Longevity in Model Organisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAplysiaCaenorhabditis elegansSet (abstract data type)Variety (cybernetics)AccidentalCognitive sciencePsychologyNeuroscienceBiologyComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

I did not set out to study C. elegans. My undergraduate and graduate training was in Psychology. My postdoctoral work involved studying learning and memory in 1 mm diameter juvenile Aplysia californica. As a starting Assistant Professor when I attempted to continue my studies on Aplysia I encountered barriers to carrying out that work; at about the same time I was introduced to Caenorhabditis elegans and decided to investigate whether they could learn and remember. My laboratory was the first to demonstrate conclusively that C. elegans could learn and in the years since then my lab and many others have demonstrated that C. elegans is capable of a variety of forms of learning and memory.

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.

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)0.000
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 score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.598

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.216 · 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