High emotional experience during autobiographical retrieval in women with Korsakoff syndrome
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: In this exploratory study, we investigated gender differences regarding autobiographical memory in KS. METHOD: We invited 33 patients with KS and 35 matched control participants to retrieve autobiographical memories and, afterward, to rate mental time travel during retrieval, emotional value and importance of memories. RESULTS: Analysis demonstrated lower specificity (i.e., lower ability to retrieve memories situated in a specific time and space), mental time travel, and importance in patients with KS compared to control participants. Analysis also demonstrated no significant difference between patients with KS and control participants regarding emotion. Critically, analysis demonstrated no significant differences neither women and men with KS, nor between women and men in the control group, regarding autobiographical specificity, mental time travel, or importance. However, women with KS attributed higher emotional value for memories compared to men with KS, and the same results were observed in the control group. DISCUSSION: These findings demonstrate that the higher emotional experience during autobiographical retrieval, as observed in the general population, can also be observed in KS.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it