Differential involvement of the anterior and posterior hippocampus, parahippocampus, and retrosplenial cortex in making precise judgments of spatial distance and object size for remotely acquired memories of environments and objects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The hippocampus is known to support processing of precise spatial information in recently learned environments. It is less clear, but crucial for theories of systems consolidation, to know whether it also supports processing of precise spatial information in familiar environments learned long ago and whether such precision extends to objects and numbers. In this fMRI study, we asked participants to make progressively more refined spatial distance judgments among well-known Toronto landmarks (whether landmark A is closer to landmark B or C) to examine hippocampal involvement. We also tested whether the hippocampus was similarly engaged in estimating magnitude regarding sizes of familiar animals and numbers. We found that the hippocampus was only engaged in spatial judgment. Activation was greater and lasted longer in the posterior than anterior hippocampus, which instead showed greater modulation as discrimination between spatial distances became more fine grained. These findings suggest that the anterior and posterior hippocampus have different functions which are influenced differently by estimation of differential distance. Similarly, parahippocampal-place-area and retrosplenial cortex were involved only in the spatial condition. By contrast, activation of the intraparietal sulcus was modulated by precision in all conditions. Therefore, our study supports the idea that the hippocampus and related structures are implicated in retrieving and operating even on remote spatial memories whenever precision is required, as posted by some theories of systems 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 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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".