MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4416026776 · doi:10.1101/2025.11.07.685935

Fronto-Hippocampal Synchronization in Rapid Spatial Learning in Humans

2025· preprint· W4416026776 on OpenAlexaff
Maya Geva‐Sagiv, Soyeon Jun, Marta Kryven, Joshua B. Tenenbaum, Erie D. Boorman, Randall C. O’Reilly, Jack J. Lin, Charan Ranganath, Ignacio Sáez

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2025
Typepreprint
Language
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMemory and Neural Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersOffice of Naval Research
KeywordsMemory consolidationHippocampal formationOrbitofrontal cortexHippocampusTemporal lobeNeurophysiologyTask (project management)Brain activity and meditationNeural activity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Achieving goals in real-life situations—from fetching a glass of water to landing a dream job—often requires planning based on experience and executing a sequence of actions. Neurophysiological research in animal models has indicated that the orbitofrontal cortex (OFC) mediates relationships between memory, actions, and outcomes and the hippocampus and other medial temporal lobe (MTL) regions are known to be critical for rapid learning, but little is known about how these areas interact to support rapid learning and retrieval of goal-directed action sequences in humans. Here, we leverage a rare opportunity to investigate human OFC gamma oscillations and examine the coordination between the OFC and MTL during a continuous multi-step task that requires applying recently acquired experience to guide behavior. We used multisite intracranial electroencephalography (iEEG) recordings while participants searched for a hidden goal in an animated game to study neural activity in both brain areas during goal-directed behavior. Hippocampal ripples—brief high-frequency oscillations reflecting synchronized neuronal firing—are known to support memory consolidation during sleep, but their role during active memory retrieval and updating remains unclear. We found that OFC gamma activity was modulated by both memory demands and ripples in the hippocampus and adjacent structures. Notably, ripple-coupled OFC gamma during exploration was associated with subsequent task performance. We propose that hippocampal ripples mark a narrow window, supporting hippocampal-cortical communication required for successful goal encoding for future behaviors.

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)0.000
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.226 · 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→