phenomenon · claim-type · cross-domain-transfer · mechanism · claim-relation · replication-status · limitation — grounded in the full text| phenomenon | neural contiguity effect in episodic memory ("jump back in time")— “The contiguity effect is an extremely robust feature of episodic memory experiments ( Kahana et al., 2008 ).” | |
| claim-type | existence— “Critically, repetition of a stimulus caused the ensemble to elicit a pattern of activity that resembled the pattern of activity present before the initial presentation of the stimulus.” | |
| method — evidence | — “In vivo single-neuron recordings were taken from the human MTL while epilepsy patients distinguished novel from repeated images in a continuous recognition memory task.” | |
| object of study — evidence | — “There is as yet no evidence, however, that repetition of a stimulus causes recovery of prior neural ensemble states in the MTL that would be the signature of a jump back in time.” | |
| research question — evidence | — “There is a disconnect in the literature between cognitive theories of episodic memory and neural circuit models of the MTL. Cognitive theories focus on the experience of mental time travel, which reinstates the learning context, thereby causing the contiguity effect. Neural circuit models of the MTL have focused on forming direct inter-item… | |
| contribution — evidence | — “The firing pattern of the ensemble of MTL neurons showed robust temporal autocorrelation over macroscopic periods of time during performance of the memory task. The gradually-changing part of the ensemble state was causally affected by the visual stimulus being presented. Critically, repetition of a stimulus caused the ensemble to elicit a… | |
| transfer | from mathematical psychology: retrieved temporal context, brought from list-memory modelling to a prediction about single units— “However, unlike short-term memory models, in retrieved temporal context models, the contiguity effect is a result of a “jump back in time.” A repeated stimulus need not cause the same input as it did when it was first presented; a repeated stimulus can recover the state of context that was available before it was initially presented. The… | transfers[0] |
| transfer | from list-learning behavioural research: recency and contiguity as the two effects any account must produce— “Episodic memory exhibits two extremely robust temporal effects in the laboratory: the recency effect and the contiguity effect. The recency effect describes the finding that more recently presented items are better remembered ( Murdock, 1962 ; Glenberg et al., 1980 ), while the contiguity effect refers to the finding that when a stimulus from… | transfers[1] |
| mechanism | A repeated stimulus triggers pattern completion of the gradually-changing context state that was active when it was first experienced, so the recovered state resembles states both before and after the original presentation— “Suppose that when a particular stimulus is repeated, this results in pattern completion of the gradually-changing pattern that was present when it was initially experienced.” | mechanisms[0] |
| mechanism | The contiguity effect is produced by a jump back in time in which the repeated item recovers the pre-presentation state of temporal context— “In these models, the contiguity effect is caused by a “jump back in time” by which a repeated stimulus recovers the state of temporal context that was available prior to its original presentation.” | mechanisms[1] |
| mechanism | Long-timescale temporal autocorrelation is generated by network properties or intrinsic cellular mechanisms that sustain firing after a transient input— “The long-term temporal autocorrelation could result from either network properties or intrinsic cellular properties that lead to persistent firing in response to a transient input.” | mechanisms[2] |
| mechanism | intrinsic cellular or network properties could produce persistent firing after a transient input, which is what a slowly changing representation would need— “The long-term temporal autocorrelation could result from either network properties or intrinsic cellular properties that lead to persistent firing in response to a transient input. An extensive and growing body of work from slice preparations suggests that neurons in many parts of the MTL are equipped with a variety of intrinsic mechansims… | mechanisms[3] |
| mechanism | recurrent CA3 connectivity could complete a gradually-changing pattern from a partial cue, which would recover the earlier context— “For decades, researchers have noted that the structure of the hippocampus, in particular the recurrent structure of CA3, could be used for autoassociative pattern completion ( Marr, 1971 ; McNaughton & Morris, 1987 ; Hasselmo & Wyble, 1997 ; Norman & O’Reilly, 2003 ). The basic idea is that during encoding, recurrent synapses are… | mechanisms[4] |
| mechanism | a repeated stimulus recovers a state that is a mixture of earlier inputs weighted by temporal proximity, rather than reinstating its own original input— “However, unlike short-term memory models, in retrieved temporal context models, the contiguity effect is a result of a “jump back in time.” A repeated stimulus need not cause the same input as it did when it was first presented; a repeated stimulus can recover the state of context that was available before it was initially presented. The… | mechanisms[5] |
| builds-on | retrieved temporal context models of episodic memory— “These findings confirm a direct prediction of this class of temporal context models and may be a signature of the mechanism that underlies the experience of episodic memory as mental time travel.” | claim_relations[0] |
| extends | Manning et al. (2011)— “Manning et al. (2011) used a similar strategy to analyze human ECoG during performance of a free recall task.” | claim_relations[1] |
| contradicts | Norman and O'Reilly (2003)— “Similarly, the Norman and O’Reilly (2003) model as published would not account for the neural contiguity effect but could be elaborated to do so.” | claim_relations[2] |
| contradicts | accounts identifying the MTL ensemble with persistent stimulus-specific activation in short-term memory— “Although the results of the contiguity analysis are not predicted by identification of the MTL ensemble with persistent stimulus-specific activation, our findings could be accommodated within existing mathematical cognitive models of short-term memory.” | claim_relations[3] |
| contradicts | short-term memory accounts in which contiguity comes from persistent stimulus activation and direct inter-item associations— “The backward effect in Figure 4c is not predicted by persistent stimulus activation in short-term memory but is predicted by a jump back in time.” | claim_relations[4] |
| supports | retrieved temporal context models of recency and contiguity— “These findings confirm a direct prediction of this class of temporal context models and may be a signature of the mechanism that underlies the experience of episodic memory as mental time travel.” | claim_relations[5] |
| extends | Manning 2011's finding that recall reinstates the pattern present during study of preceding items— “However, there are two important limitations of that study. First, it is not clear whether the context reinstatement effect generalizes to the level of units. Second, because the order of free recall is unconstrained the study leaves open the possibility that the neural state during retrieval of an item resembles the activity associated with… | claim_relations[6] |
| contradicts | models in which the gradually changing memory representation is independent of the stimuli presented— “Our results show strong evidence that the MTL maintains a representation that changes gradually over time that is not attributable to recording artifacts nor to uncontrolled experimental variables. These accounts would have predicted a flat curve in Figure 4c .” | claim_relations[7] |
| builds-on | evidence for temporal autocorrelation and stimulus selectivity in MTL neurons— “There is as yet no evidence, however, that repetition of a stimulus causes recovery of prior neural ensemble states in the MTL that would be the signature of a jump back… | claim_relations[8] |
| sense | THE TWO RIVALS ARE MADE TO AGREE EVERYWHERE BUT ONE PLACE: both predict a gradually changing state caused by the stimuli, and the paper says so before testing anything | senses[0] |
| sense | and the discriminating prediction is an ASYMMETRY: short-term memory predicts resemblance only to states AFTER the original presentation, a jump back in time predicts resemblance in both directions Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | senses[1] |
| sense | a jump back in time is defined as recovering the context that existed BEFORE the stimulus was first presented, not as reinstating the stimulus's own input Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | senses[2] |
| sense | temporally-autocorrelated is an operational label: units whose lag-one regression coefficient on the previous event's firing rate is significantly above zero, about a quarter of all units Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | senses[3] |
| sense | each unit is treated as an independent observation and as a one-cell ensemble, because unit counts vary across sessions and sessions were at least 48 hours apart Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | senses[4] |
| sense | the design was chosen over free recall precisely because repetition order is under experimenter control rather than following the subject's own retrieval Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | senses[5] |
| control | the analysis restricted to pairs of events WITHIN THE SAME BLOCK, which were necessarily from the same category — held — rules out category membership as an artefactual source of contiguity - events from one category cluster in time by construction, so a temporal-contiguity effect could be category structure wearing a clock Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | controls[0] |
| evidential status | Manning 2011's finding that recall reinstates the pattern present during study of preceding items — the paper's own words: is not clear Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | claim_relations[6] |
| note | jump back in time —distinct-from→ short-term memory — AND THEY DIFFER IN EXACTLY ONE PLACE: short-term memory predicts resemblance only FORWARD of the original presentation, a jump back predicts it in both directions Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concept_edges[1] |
| note | jump back in time —part-of→ temporal context — the recovered state is a mixture of earlier inputs weighted by proximity, NOT a reinstatement of the stimulus's own input Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concept_edges[2] |
| audit | block —distinct-from→ temporal autocorrelation — Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its span and kept, but the span isolates autocorrelation from block effects; distinct-from is loose. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concept_edges[7] |
| note | block —distinct-from→ temporal autocorrelation — and the block structure is removed by restricting every comparison to pairs of events inside one block Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concept_edges[7] |
| audit | recency —causes→ ensemble similarity — Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its span and kept, but the span is a counterfactual ('if recency were the only factor'); causes states it as a finding. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concept_edges[9] |
| note | recency —causes→ ensemble similarity — and the recency gradient is then ESTIMATED and SUBTRACTED, so what remains is the contiguity effect alone Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concept_edges[9] |
| audit | persistent firing —causes→ temporal autocorrelation — Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its full span and kept, but the autocorrelation 'COULD RESULT FROM' properties leading to persistent firing; causes is hedged. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concept_edges[10] |
| weight | persistent firing —causes→ temporal autocorrelation — 0.9 Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concept_edges[10] |
| audit | pattern completion —causes→ jump back in time — Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its full span and kept, but CA3's structure 'COULD BE USED FOR' pattern completion to recover the state; causes is hedged. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concept_edges[11] |
| note | pattern completion —causes→ jump back in time — offered as the recovery mechanism, from the recurrent structure of CA3 Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concept_edges[11] |
| weight | pattern completion —causes→ jump back in time — 0.8 Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concept_edges[11] |
| audit | hippocampus —contrasted-with→ amygdala — Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its span and kept, but the span is cut before the regional contrast is stated. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concept_edges[12] |
| note | hippocampus —contrasted-with→ amygdala — A REGIONAL NULL: hippocampus, parahippocampal region and entorhinal cortex all far exceed the Type I error rate and do not differ from each other; the amygdala does not exceed it at all Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concept_edges[12] |
| audit | continuous recognition —operationalised-as→ jump back in time — Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its full span and kept, but the continuous recognition experiment gives 'a better opportunity to assess' the jump back in time; operationalised-as is loose. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concept_edges[13] |
| note | continuous recognition —operationalised-as→ jump back in time — chosen over free recall BECAUSE the repetition order is set by the experimenter rather than by the subject's retrieval Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concept_edges[13] |
| note | recency effect —contrasted-with→ contiguity effect — the two behavioural effects any account must produce, and here they appear superimposed in one curve Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concept_edges[14] |
| outcome (stated by the tagger, no quotation) | control — held | controls[0] |
| for which use | limitation — what the ensemble change means: WE CANNOT DETERMINE WITH CERTAINTY FROM THESE DATA whether the change was specific to the stimulus or general Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[0] |
| for which use | limitation — the upper end of the timescale: THE RESULTS FROM THIS EXPERIMENT DO NOT PLACE A STRONG CONSTRAINT ON THE UPPER LIMIT OF THE TIME-SCALE OF THE AUTOCORRELATION Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[1] |
| for which use | limitation — any comparison between regions: WE AVERAGED OVER 3 s INTERVALS SO THAT DIFFERENCES BETWEEN REGIONS THAT MANIFEST ON SHORTER TIME SCALES WOULD BE INVISIBLE TO US Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[2] |
| for which use | limitation — every contrast in the blocked design: IT WOULD BE IMPOSSIBLE TO COMPLETELY CONTROL ALL POSSIBLE RELEVANT VARIABLES, so position in block, recency distribution and new/old ordering ride along Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[3] |
| for which use | limitation — the functional form of the change: OUR DATA ANALYSES ASSUME THAT THE ENSEMBLE CHANGES OVER TIME BUT THEY DO NOT UNIQUELY SUPPORT A PARTICULAR MATHEMATICAL FORM OF THE CHANGE Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[4] |
| for which use | limitation — the recency-versus-contiguity separation, done statistically rather than by design: FUTURE RESEARCH SHOULD DISENTANGLE RECENCY FROM CONTIGUITY BY, FOR INSTANCE, PRESENTING REPEATED STIMULI AFTER A LONG DELAY Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[5] |
| for which use | limitation — the mechanistic account that follows: WHILE NECESSARILY SPECULATIVE, IT IS WORTH THINKING ABOUT HOW THESE TWO FUNCTIONS MIGHT BE ACCOMPLISHED Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[6] |
| for which use | limitation — the same scope as limitations[0] - what exactly is retrieved is undetermined Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[7] |
| for which use | limitation — the same scope as limitations[2] - the 3 s averaging hides faster regional differences Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[8] |
| for which use | limitation — the blocked design: IT IS NECESSARILY THE CASE THAT THE FIRST STIMULUS SHOWN IN A BLOCK IS NEW AND THE LAST STIMULUS IN THE BLOCK IS OLD Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[9] |
| for which use | limitation — the stimulus-coding claim: ROBUST STIMULUS CODING WAS NOT OBSERVED USING THIS METHOD IN THE TEMPORALLY-AUTOCORRELATED PART OF THE ENSEMBLE, t(15) = 0.46 - only category specificity was Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[10] |
| replication | untested | |
| no type for this | category → event number — THE TWO CANNOT BE SEPARATED IN THIS STUDY - the DESIGN form of the negative relation / No edge type can express it: all eight assert that a relation HOLDS. Recorded here because a confounding statement BOUNDS WHAT THE PAPER'S OWN RESULTS CAN MEAN, and it lives in a methods paragraph where nothing downstream will find it. A design confound stated plainly in a methods sentence. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | unhoused_relations[0] |
| limitation | The data cannot establish whether the ensemble change caused by a stimulus's first presentation was specific to that stimulus. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[0] |
| limitation | The experiment cannot bound the longest time scale over which the ensemble representation is autocorrelated. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[1] |
| limitation | Averaging firing rates over 3 s windows makes any faster regional differences undetectable. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[2] |
| limitation | The blocked design leaves some variables (position in block, distribution of recencies, new/old ordering) uncontrolled. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[3] |
| limitation | The analyses do not discriminate among mathematical forms of the gradual change. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[4] |
| limitation | Recency and contiguity had to be disentangled statistically rather than by design. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[5] |
| limitation | the mechanistic account of how the jump back in time is accomplished is labelled necessarily speculative Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[6] |
| limitation | the data cannot settle what exactly is retrieved when the ensemble state is recovered Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[7] |
| limitation | firing was averaged over three-second intervals, so regional differences on shorter timescales could not be seen Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[8] |
| limitation | some design variables cannot be controlled at all: the first stimulus of a block is necessarily new and the last necessarily old Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[9] |
| limitation | autocorrelated units did not show robust stimulus coding by this method, only category specificity Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[10] |
finding · quantity · variable · definition · key-term — grounded in the full text| finding | MTL ensemble activity changed gradually over tens of seconds, and the change was causally affected by which stimulus was shown. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[0] |
| finding | Repeating a stimulus recovered ensemble activity that had been present before its original presentation — a reliable backward contiguity effect. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[1] |
| finding | Ensemble similarity also fell off in the forward direction, which is consistent with either short-term memory or retrieved-context accounts. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[2] |
| finding | Ensemble similarity was greater for same-category than for different-category pairs. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[3] |
| finding | The temporally autocorrelated part of the ensemble did not show robust stimulus coding. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[4] |
| finding | The contiguity analysis gives very strong evidence against all of the temporal autocorrelation being artifactual. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[5] |
| finding | THE RIVALS SHARE TWO PREDICTIONS BY CONSTRUCTION: both require a gradually changing state caused by the presented stimuli Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[6] |
| finding | AND DIFFER IN ONE ASYMMETRY: short-term memory predicts resemblance only to states following the original presentation, a jump back in time predicts both directions Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[7] |
| finding | so the signature sought is a repeated stimulus recovering activity present BEFORE its original presentation Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[8] |
| finding | lag one regression coefficients were above zero overall and about a quarter of units qualified as temporally autocorrelated Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[9] |
| finding | autocorrelated units fired above baseline BEFORE the stimulus appeared, so they were not simply responding to it Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[10] |
| finding | hippocampus, parahippocampal region and entorhinal cortex all far exceeded the Type I error rate; the amygdala did not Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[11] |
| finding | BLOCK STRUCTURE REMOVED BY RESTRICTION: all comparisons confined to pairs of events within one block, which are necessarily same-category Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[12] |
| finding | A LOWER BOUND ON THE TIMESCALE: excluding the eight nearest recencies still left a significant slope, so the ensemble kept changing past 27 seconds Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[13] |
| finding | CATEGORY AND RECENCY SEPARATED BY MATCHING: comparisons made across pairs of similarities at the same recency Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[14] |
| finding | so the category effect cannot be attributed to the confounding of recency with category structure Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[15] |
| finding | A DISSOCIATION INSIDE THE ENSEMBLE: the autocorrelated units showed category specificity but not robust stimulus coding, t = 0.46 Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[16] |
| finding | while the non-autocorrelated units showed both stimulus and category selectivity Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[17] |
| finding | THE ARTEFACT CLASS DEFINED BY WHAT IT CANNOT KNOW: no recording artefact would make spike shape depend on which picture was shown Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[18] |
| finding | ONE ANALYSIS SERVING TWO PURPOSES: the contiguity analysis both diagnoses a causal link to the stimulus and looks for the jump back in time Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[19] |
| finding | and the question is declared meaningless for units that are not autocorrelated in the first place Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[20] |
| finding | SORTING ERROR ONE ANSWERED: splitting one neuron across units could fake autocorrelation but not stimulus specificity, block sensitivity, or retained information about preceding stimuli Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[21] |
| finding | SORTING ERROR TWO ANSWERED: merging neurons could fake conjunctions, but not a response to the neighbours of a particular stimulus's original presentation Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[22] |
| finding | curves peaked at zero and falling off both ways would otherwise require the particular picture to change the shape of recorded spikes Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[23] |
| finding | AND AN ENVIRONMENTAL CLASS RULED OUT TOO: a fan or other sound present during part of a session cannot produce a contiguity effect Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[24] |
| finding | the artefactual and stimulus-independent accounts would both have predicted a flat curve Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[25] |
| finding | THE DECIDING RESULT: the backward effect is not predicted by persistent stimulus activation but is predicted by a jump back in time Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[26] |
| finding | the recency gradient was estimated and subtracted so that what remained on the lag axis was contiguity alone Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[27] |
| finding | SOME CONFOUNDS ARE STRUCTURAL AND UNCONTROLLABLE: the first stimulus of a block is necessarily new and the last necessarily old Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[28] |
| finding | the prior free-recall result had two named limitations: it was not at unit level, and recall order was set by the subject Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[29] |
| finding | which is why repetition under experimenter control gives a better test of the causal relationship Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[30] |
| finding | UNIT CRITERIA STATED NUMERICALLY: clear refractory periods, amplitude over 100 microvolts, under 1 percent of spikes below 3 ms Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[31] |
| finding | with a power-spectrum check discarding units carrying significant 60 Hz line noise Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[32] |
| finding | and every unit inspected by a human observer as well as by the clustering algorithm Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[33] |
| finding | the three-second analysis window is shorter than the minimum inter-stimulus interval, so no spike is counted twice Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[34] |
| finding | patients discriminated new from old reliably with no bias, hit rate .82 and correct rejection .83 Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[35] |
| quantity | .248 — proportion of recorded units classified as temporally autocorrelated Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[0] |
| quantity | 44/270 — number of units that were category-selective Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[1] |
| quantity | mean .094 ± .01 — average lag one regression coefficient across units, significantly above zero Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[2] |
| quantity | hit rate = .82 ± .07; correct rejection rate = .83 ± .07 — patients' recognition performance on the continuous recognition task Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[3] |
| quantity | .0042 ± .0015, F (1, 9) = 7.48, p < .03 — backward-direction regression of ensemble similarity on |lag| — the key jump-back-in-time result Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[4] |
| quantity | more than 27 s — lower bound on the time scale over which the ensemble kept changing reliably Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[5] |
| quantity | four patients, eight recording sessions — size of the human single-unit dataset Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[6] |
| quantity | .248 — share of units classified as temporally autocorrelated Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[7] |
| quantity | more than 27 s — lower bound on the timescale over which the ensemble kept changing Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[8] |
| quantity | > 100 microvolts and less than 1% — amplitude and refractory-violation criteria defining a single unit Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[9] |
| quantity | 3.10 s — minimum inter-stimulus interval, which is what makes the 3 s window safe Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[10] |
| quantity | .82 ± .07 and .83 ± .07 — hit rate and correct rejection rate, showing no response bias Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[11] |
| variable | repetition of a stimulus (independent) Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.variables[0] |
| variable | average firing rate (dependent) Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.variables[3] |
| variable | ensemble similarities of event vectors (dependent) Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.variables[4] |
| variable | recency Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.variables[5] |
| variable | lag Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.variables[6] |
| variable | temporal autocorrelation Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.variables[7] |
| definition | recency effect Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[0] |
| definition | temporally-autocorrelated units Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[1] |
| definition | lag one regression coefficient Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[3] |
| definition | contiguity effect Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[4] |
| definition | jump back in time Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[5] |
| definition | temporal autocorrelation Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[6] |
| definition | ensemble similarity Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[7] |
| key-terms | contiguity effect, recency effect, temporal context, short-term memory, jump back in time, temporal autocorrelation, ensemble similarity, MTL, hippocampus, amygdala, continuous recognition, block, category, recency, lag, pattern completion, artifact |
| concept | contiguity effect — not defined in this paper's own words; memory for neighbours of a remembered item is enhanced Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concepts[0] |
| linear regression F | as written: A linear regression showed a significant effect of recency on ensemble similarity Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[0] |
| t-test t | as written: t(269) = 9.31, p < .001 Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[1] |
| paired t-test t | as written: paired t-test across recencies Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[2] |
| chi-squared test χ 2 | as written: χ 2 (2) = 4.87, p > .05 Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[3] |
| ANOVA F | as written: An ANOVA with |lag| as a regressor and direction (forward vs backward) as a categorical variable Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[4] |
| z-score standardisation | as written: we z-transformed each unit’s activity across events Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[5] |
| lag one regression coefficient | Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[6] |
| Type I error rate | Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[7] |
| paired t-test | Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[8] |
| claim type | existence — a second reading reaching the same value; recorded: existence Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | alternatives.claim_type |
| method | microwire single-unit recording during a continuous recognition task, with ensemble similarity analysed as a function of recency and of lag from the original presentation — a second reading DIFFERING from the recorded value; recorded: electrophysiology Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | alternatives.method |
| phenomenon | temporal autocorrelation of MTL ensemble firing over tens of seconds, with a contiguity effect superimposed on it — a second reading DIFFERING from the recorded value; recorded: neural contiguity effect in episodic memory ("jump back in time") Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | alternatives.phenomenon |
When we have changed our mind. Some entries in the table begin with a word in capitals and the reason for it. EVIDENCE CORRECTED — the finding still stands, but we had quoted the wrong sentence from the paper, and the quotation has been replaced with the right one. RETRACTED — the entry itself was wrong; it stays on the page, marked, with the reason, rather than being deleted. WITHDRAWN AND REPLACED — the entry was wrong, and a corrected version of it appears in the entries below. Each mark carries its own reason, in brackets, because the reasons differ from one entry to the next. An entry we have WITHDRAWN is removed from this page and kept in the record, with its reason. A line reading Audit and a date is a later re-reading of the entry against its whole sentence: DOUBTFUL means it was kept, and the reason says what is loose about it. Quotation marks inside the tagger's sentence. Where a tag is the tagger's own sentence, a phrase in quotation marks inside it is borrowed from the paper — the tagger's wording around it is not. The paper's own sentence is the evidence quote for that row; on this page it is withheld with the article, and the article is at its publisher. Nothing inside quotation marks anywhere on this page is ours: if it is quoted, it is the paper's. Whose words a concept carries. A concept entry records a term the paper itself uses, so the term, the sense given for it, and its evidence are the paper's own words, quoted where the paper fixes them. This is the opposite of a sense entry in the tag table, which is the tagger's sentence about how the paper uses a term. Where a concept entry could not be grounded in the paper's words, the entry says so on its own row.
Tag layer © the Meta-Tagging Project, CC BY 4.0. The paper text is © its authors/publisher
and is linked, not reproduced. Excerpts shown are short quotations for identification and verification.
· back to index
· concepts · authors
· עברית
© 2026 Shir Sivroni · ORCID 0009-0000-2597-2824