Declarative Memory Through the Lens of Single-Trial Peaks in High-Frequency Power
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Declarative memory depends on the coordination of local processing, indexed by high-frequency broadband (HFB) activity, with global network organization, indexed by theta oscillations. However, theta and HFB exhibit asynchronous timing, raising the question of how results of local processing are communicated throughout the network. Using intracranial EEG in patients performing a recognition memory task, we examined this coordination across the medial temporal lobe (MTL) and prefrontal cortex (PFC). HFB peak activity was earlier in the MTL than PFC. Anchoring analyses of theta phase clustering and connectivity to HFB peaks revealed strong phase clustering locked to HFB peaks in the PFC, as well as connectivity between the PFC and MTL that predicted individual memory performance. Graph analysis revealed specific connections amidst sparse network connectivity during memory success. This study demonstrates that transient brain states linked to internal physiological events support memory and refines our understanding of local and network-level process interactions. Highlights Memory-linked theta activity is time-locked to internal brain events Network connectivity changes dynamically during memory processing Sparse network connectivity supports successful memory Specific sequences of transient states may be critical for declarative memory
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 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".