MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4412789673 · doi:10.1101/2025.07.25.666835

Neural components underlying successful free recall are specific to episodic memory

2025· preprint· en· W4412789673 on OpenAlexaff
Riley D. DeHaan, Youssef Ezzyat, Michael J. Randazzo, Aditya M. Rao, Alexander Papanastassiou, Aaron S. Geller, Bradley Lega, Joshua P. Aronson, Barbara C. Jobst, Kareem A. Zaghloul, Gregory A. Worrell, Sameer A. Sheth, Michael R. Sperling, Michael J. Kahana

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMemory and Neural Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEpisodic memoryRecallFree recallCognitive psychologyPsychologyComputer scienceNeuroscienceCognitive scienceCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Episodic memory depends upon activity distributed across the brain. However, the activity underlying memory has largely been examined within single tasks in isolation. Thus it is unclear to what extent prior findings reflect task-general rather than memory-specific cognitive processes. Here we address this question using data from 371 patients recorded intracranially who performed a free recall task with encoding and retrieval phases alongside an arithmetic distractor phase. We ask whether neural decoders fit to predict behavior from one phase transfer to the others. Encoding-retrieval transfer exceeds both arithmetic-encoding and arithmetic-retrieval transfer and therefore cannot be explained solely by processes supporting arithmetic. We further detect transfer between arithmetic and retrieval but not between arithmetic and encoding. The brain-behavioral relations observed in these tasks thus do not merely reflect a single task-general factor of activity. We propose cross-task decoding as a method for identifying the neural factor structure underlying distinct cognitive processes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.101
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.185 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicMemory and Neural Mechanisms→French-language works237,207→