MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Remembering

2021· book· en· W4254613549 on OpenAlexaff
Fergus I. M. Craik

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMemory Processes and Influences
Canadian institutionsBaycrest Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitive scienceLevels-of-processing effectCognitionEncoding (memory)Episodic memorySemantic memoryCognitive psychologyPsychologyComputer scienceNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The book sets out Fergus Craik’s view of human memory as a dynamic activity of mind and brain. In this account, remembering is understood as a system of active cognitive processes, similar to the processes underlying attending, perceiving, and thinking. The book therefore extends and elaborates the concept of “levels of processing” proposed by Craik and Lockhart (1972). Thus, encoding processes are essentially the mental activities involved in perceiving and understanding, and retrieval is described as the partial reactivation of these same processes. It is further suggested that “memory traces” are represented by a hierarchically organized system of analyzers, modified, sharpened, and differentiated by encounters with successive events. This account proposes that episodic and semantic memory should be thought of as levels in a continuum of specificity rather than as separate systems of memory. The book also covers Craik’s views on working memory and on changes in memory as a function of aging. In the latter case the losses are attributed largely to a difficulty with the self-initiation of appropriate encoding and retrieval operations, compensated by support from the external environment. There is a short chapter on the cognitive neuroscience of human memory, and a final chapter bringing the ideas together. The book covers the development of these ideas, illustrated substantially by experiments from Craik’s own laboratory, and also by empirical and theoretical contributions from other researchers. The final product is a broad account of current ideas and findings in contemporary memory research but viewed from Craik’s personal theoretical standpoint.

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 score0.262
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

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)0.0080.001

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations7
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMemory Processes and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207