Autobiographical Memory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Autobiographical memory—memory for one’s personal past—is a multifaceted mnemonic activity that evolves throughout the life span and interacts with numerous other cognitive functions. Retrieving personal past events engages processes of cue specification, search, and elaboration of details within the specified event. The retrieved content varies from specific episodes unique in time and place to more general representations of autobiographical facts (personal semantics). As expected given this complexity, autobiographical memory is mediated by distributed brain networks, with key regions in the medial temporal lobes and their connections to both anterior and posterior cortical regions supporting different levels of specificity in memory retrieval. These patterns only partially overlap with those evoked by laboratory-based episodic memory paradigms. Whereas most empirical work on autobiographical memory focuses on the recall of particular past events, more recent research concerns individual differences in the way that people tend to remember their past. The formal study of autobiographical memory dates to the 19th century, but research in this field is burgeoning, particularly in relation to brain network connectivity. New paradigms that bridge the gap between traditional laboratory memory tasks and rich, naturalistic autobiographical memories will enhance the understanding of memory as it operates in everyday life.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.027 | 0.008 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".