MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4315977400 · doi:10.1016/j.isci.2023.105970

Consolidation of cellular memory representations in superficial neocortex

2023· article· en· W4315977400 on OpenAlexafffund
Ingrid M. Esteves, HaoRan Chang, Adam Neumann, Bruce L. McNaughton

Bibliographic record

VenueiScience · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMemory and Neural Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Institutes of HealthAdvanced Research Projects AgencyCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchDefense Advanced Research Projects AgencyNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeNational Institute of Mental HealthWestern Canada Research GridCompute Canada
KeywordsNeocortexMemory consolidationHippocampusNeuroscienceConsolidation (business)Computer scienceMemory formationPsychologyCognitive science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Systems-level memory consolidation, a key concept in memory research, involves the conversion of memories that depend on the hippocampus for their formation into efficient hippocampus-independent forms, presumably encoded by cortico-cortical connections. Yet, little is understood about the nature of consolidated neural codes at the cellular ensemble level. Mice require an intact hippocampus for "virtual" spatial learning and to develop neocortical representations of the corresponding experiences. We find that, whereas a novel virtual environment is neither learned nor represented in superficial cortex following severe damage to hippocampus, pre-operatively learned memories and their corresponding sparse and widespread neural ensemble representations in cortical layers II–III are preserved, a sine qua non of memory consolidation. These findings provide a new window for future study of the cellular mechanisms of memory consolidation.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.231

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.119
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.228 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations10
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueiScienceSame topicMemory and Neural MechanismsFrench-language works237,207