MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388363092 · doi:10.1016/j.ibneur.2023.08.1681

DIFFERENTIAL BRAIN REGIONAL’S INVOLVEMENT IN CONTEXTUAL MEMORIES ENCODED CLOSE IN TIME

2023· article· en· W4388363092 on OpenAlexaff
Natalia Arias, Alba Gutierrez Menendez, María Banqueri, Jorge L. Arias

Bibliographic record

VenueIBRO Neuroscience Reports · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFace Recognition and Perception
Canadian institutionsDiscovery Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDifferential (mechanical device)NeurosciencePsychologyCognitive psychologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The memory allocation hypothesis predicts that distinct memories encoded close in time can share an engram, and this occurs, among others, in contextual-related fear memory traces. In order to address contextual memory encoded close in time, we performed a contextual fear-related training with Wistar rats (n=21), using 3 different contexts separated by long or short intervals depending on the context. We found that freezing behavior was found in an aversive and close encoded context, but not in distal encoded context, which means that the memory allocation process between two events took place.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.452
Threshold uncertainty score0.828

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIBRO Neuroscience ReportsSame topicFace Recognition and PerceptionFrench-language works237,207