Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25750246›Full record

ReviewPhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2015

Memory, modelling and Marr: a commentary on Marr (1971) 'Simple memory: a theory of archicortex'.

D J Willshaw, P Dayan, R G M Morris

Abstract readHistorical ArticleReview
In one paragraph

Review in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Computational Foundations of Natural Intelligence.Frontiers in computational neuroscience · 2017
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

D J WillshawSchool of Informatics, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh EH8 9LE, UK.
P DayanGatsby Computational Neuroscience Unit, University College London, London WC1N 3AR, UK.
R G M MorrisCentre for Cognitive and Neural Systems, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh EH8 9JZ, UK r.g.m.morris@ed.ac.uk.

Funding

Medical Research CouncilWellcome Trust 091593
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

David Marr's theory of the archicortex, a brain structure now more commonly known as the hippocampus and hippocampal formation, is an epochal contribution to theoretical neuroscience. Addressing the problem of how information about 10 000 events could be stored in the archicortex during the day so that they can be retrieved using partial information and then transferred to the neocortex overnight, the paper presages a whole wealth of later empirical and theoretical work, proving impressively prescient. Despite this impending success, Marr later apparently grew dissatisfied with this style of modelling, but he went on to make seminal suggestions that continue to resonate loudly throughout the field of theoretical neuroscience. We describe Marr's theory of the archicortex and his theory of theories, setting them into their original and a contemporary context, and assessing their impact. This commentary was written to celebrate the 350th anniversary of the journal Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society.

Indexed as

Models, NeurologicalHippocampusHistory, 20th CenturyHumansMemoryNeuroscienceshippocampusmemorytheoretical neuroscience

Identifiers

PMID25750246
PMCPMC4360131

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.