Consolidation Enhances Sequential Multistep Anticipation but Diminishes Access to Perceptual Features
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many experiences unfold predictably over time. Memory for these temporal regularities enables anticipation of events multiple steps into the future. Because temporally predictable events repeat over days, weeks, and years, we must maintain—and potentially transform—memories of temporal structure to support adaptive behavior. We explored how individuals build durable models of temporal regularities to guide multistep anticipation. Healthy young adults (Experiment 1: N = 99, age range = 18–40 years; Experiment 2: N = 204, age range = 19–40 years) learned sequences of scene images that were predictable at the category level and contained incidental perceptual details. Individuals then anticipated upcoming scene categories multiple steps into the future, immediately and at a delay. Consolidation increased the efficiency of anticipation, particularly for events further in the future, but diminished access to perceptual features. Further, maintaining a link-based model of the sequence after consolidation improved anticipation accuracy. Consolidation may therefore promote efficient and durable models of temporal structure, thus facilitating anticipation of future events.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".