MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389054487 · doi:10.1038/s41467-023-43254-7

Cortical reactivation of spatial and non-spatial features coordinates with hippocampus to form a memory dialogue

2023· article· en· W4389054487 on OpenAlexafffund
HaoRan Chang, Ingrid M. Esteves, Adam Neumann, Majid H. Mohajerani, Bruce L. McNaughton

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Communications · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMemory and Neural Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityDouglas Mental Health University InstituteUniversity of Lethbridge
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of LethbridgeAdvanced Research Projects AgencyU.S. Department of Health and Human ServicesNational Institutes of HealthGovernment of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchDefense Advanced Research Projects AgencyAlzheimer SocietyAlberta InnovatesU.S. Department of Defense
KeywordsHippocampusNeuroscienceSpatial memorySpatial cognitionComputer scienceBiologyWorking memoryCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Episodic memories comprise diverse attributes of experience distributed across neocortical areas. The hippocampus is integral to rapidly binding these diffuse representations, as they occur, to be later reinstated. However, the nature of the information exchanged during this hippocampal-cortical dialogue remains poorly understood. A recent study has shown that the secondary motor cortex carries two types of representations: place cell-like activity, which were impaired by hippocampal lesions, and responses tied to visuo-tactile cues, which became more pronounced following hippocampal lesions. Using two-photon Ca 2+ imaging to record neuronal activities in the secondary motor cortex of male Thy1-GCaMP6s mice, we assessed the cortical retrieval of spatial and non-spatial attributes from previous explorations in a virtual environment. We show that, following navigation, spontaneous resting state reactivations convey varying degrees of spatial (trajectory sequences) and non-spatial (visuo-tactile attributes) information, while reactivations of non-spatial attributes tend to precede reactivations of spatial representations surrounding hippocampal sharp-wave ripples.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 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

Citations13
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature CommunicationsSame topicMemory and Neural MechanismsFrench-language works237,207