Organization of pRF size along the AP axis of the hippocampus and adjacent medial temporal cortex is related to specialization for scenes versus faces
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The hippocampus is largely recognized for its integral contributions to memory processing. By contrast, its role in perceptual processing remains less clear. Hippocampal properties vary along the anterior-posterior (AP) axis. Based on past research suggesting a gradient in the scale of features processed along the AP extent of the hippocampus, the representations have been proposed to vary as a function of granularity along this axis. One way to quantify such granularity is with population receptive field (pRF) size measured during visual processing, which has so far received little attention. In this study, we compare the pRF sizes within the hippocampus to its activation for images of scenes versus faces. We also measure these functional properties in surrounding medial temporal lobe (MTL) structures. Consistent with past research, we find pRFs to be larger in the anterior than in the posterior hippocampus. Critically, our analysis of surrounding MTL regions, the perirhinal cortex, entorhinal cortex, and parahippocampal cortex shows a similar correlation between scene sensitivity and larger pRF size. These findings provide conclusive evidence for a tight relationship between the pRF size and the sensitivity to image content in the hippocampus and adjacent medial temporal cortex.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".