Hippocampal output suppresses orbitofrontal cortex schema cell formation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Both the orbitofrontal cortex (OFC) and the hippocampus (HC) are implicated in the formation of cognitive maps and their generalization into schemas. However, how these areas interact in supporting this function remains unclear, with some proposals supporting a serial model in which the OFC draws on task representations created by the HC to extract key behavioral features and others suggesting a parallel model in which both regions construct representations that highlight different types of information. In the present study, we tested between these two models by asking how schema correlates in rat OFC would be affected by inactivating the output of the HC, after learning and during transfer across problems. We found that the prevalence and content of schema correlates were unaffected by inactivating one major HC output area, the ventral subiculum, after learning, whereas inactivation during transfer accelerated their formation. These results favor the proposal that the OFC and HC operate in parallel to extract different features defining cognitive maps and schemas.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".