MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311566813 · doi:10.1093/cercor/bhac481

Development of the neural correlates of recollection

2022· article· en· W4311566813 on OpenAlexafffund
Hilary Sweatman, C. Paula Lewis‐de los Angeles, Jiahe Zhang, Carlo de los Angeles, Noa Ofen, John D. E. Gabrieli, Xiaoqian J. Chai

Bibliographic record

VenueCerebral Cortex · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMemory Processes and Influences
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNational Institute of Mental HealthCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMcGovern Institute for Brain Research, Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyAthinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Massachusetts General HospitalHealth CanadaCanada First Research Excellence FundCanada Research ChairsNational Institutes of HealthGovernment of CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFondation Brain CanadaMcGill University
KeywordsPrecuneusRecallPsychologyAngular gyrusEpisodic memoryPrefrontal cortexTemporal lobeNeuroscienceHippocampusCognitive psychologyParahippocampal gyrusFunctional magnetic resonance imagingCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recollection of past events has been associated with the core recollection network comprising the posterior medial temporal lobe and parietal regions, as well as the medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC). The development of the brain basis for recollection is understudied. In a sample of adults (n = 22; 18-25 years) and children (n = 23; 9-13 years), the present study aimed to address this knowledge gap using a cued recall paradigm, known to elicit recollection experience. Successful recall was associated with activations in regions of the core recollection network and frontoparietal network. Adults exhibited greater successful recall activations compared with children in the precuneus and right angular gyrus. In contrast, similar levels of successful recall activations were observed in both age groups in the mPFC. Group differences were also seen in the hippocampus and lateral frontal regions. These findings suggest that the engagement of the mPFC in episodic retrieval may be relatively early maturing, whereas the contribution to episodic retrieval of more posterior regions such as the precuneus and angular gyrus undergoes more protracted maturation.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCerebral CortexSame topicMemory Processes and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207