Evidence for novelty reward cross-cueing in the odor span task in rats: implications for odor-based reward-motivated tasks
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The odor span task (OST) infers working memory capacity (WMC) by requiring rodents to discriminate between previously presented and session-novel odors to obtain a hidden food reward. Here, rats' responses to session-novel odors and food rewards were assessed to determine whether rats use mitigating strategies in the OST. Rats accurately responded to session-novel odors but also reliably responded to the food reward alone and performed at chance when both a session-novel odor and food reward were presented in separate locations. The inclusion of unscented sand in the cups holding the food reward significantly reduced the rats' responses to the food reward alone. Collectively, these results demonstrate the need for rigorous tests of potential mitigating strategies and hold wide implications for rodent odor discrimination-based behavioral tasks.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it