MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Memory

2008· other· en· W4241077468 on OpenAlexaff
Ian Neath

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Encyclopedia of Communication · 2008
Typeother
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMemory Processes and Influences
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNothingMetaphorComputer scienceSet (abstract data type)Process (computing)Cognitive sciencePsychologyEpistemologyLinguisticsPhilosophyProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When most people think of memory, they tend to think of a place in which information is put and stored until it is needed, much like a library. Unfortunately, this metaphor is quite misleading in that it implies a static, veridical process. Nothing really happens to library books while sitting on the shelf; they may grow musty, they might be mis‐shelved, but once one has the book, the contents are identical to the last time the book was consulted. In contrast, human memory is a dynamic, fundamentally reconstructive set of processes that enable previously encoded information to affect current and future performance.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.090
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.258 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Encyclopedia of CommunicationSame topicMemory Processes and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207