Schemas provide a scaffold for neocortical integration of new memories over time
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Memory transformation is increasingly acknowledged in theoretical accounts of systems consolidation, yet how memory quality and neural representation change over time and how schemas influence this process remains unclear. We examined the behavioral quality and neural representation of schema-congruent and incongruent object-scene pairs retrieved across 10-minutes and 72-hours using fMRI. When a congruent schema was available, memory became coarser over time, aided by post-encoding coupling between the anterior hippocampus and medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC). Only schema-congruent representations were integrated in the mPFC over time, and were organized according to schematic context. In the hippocampus, pattern similarity changed across 72-hours such that the posterior hippocampus represented specific details and the anterior hippocampus represented the general context of specific memories, irrespective of congruency. Our findings suggest schemas are used as a scaffold to facilitate neocortical integration of congruent information, and illustrate evolution in hippocampal organization of detailed contextual memory over time.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".