Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38841455›Full record

ReviewHeliyon2024

The memory systems of the human brain and generative artificial intelligence.

Edmund T Rolls

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. The neuroscience of transformers.Cognitive neurodynamics · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

1 author.

Edmund T RollsOxford Centre for Computational Neuroscience, Oxford, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Generative Artificial Intelligence foundation models (for example Generative Pre-trained Transformer - GPT - models) can generate the next token given a sequence of tokens. How can this 'generative AI' be compared with the 'real' intelligence of the human brain, when for example a human generates a whole memory in response to an incomplete retrieval cue, and then generates further prospective thoughts? Here these two types of generative intelligence, artificial in machines and real in the human brain are compared, and it is shown how when whole memories are generated by hippocampal recall in response to an incomplete retrieval cue, what the human brain computes, and how it computes it, are very different from generative AI. Key differences are the use of local associative learning rules in the hippocampal memory system, and of non-local backpropagation of error learning in AI. Indeed, it is argued that the whole operation of the human brain is performed computationally very differently to what is implemented in generative AI. Moreover, it is emphasized that the primate including human hippocampal system includes computations about spatial view and where objects and people are in scenes, whereas in rodents the emphasis is on place cells and path integration by movements between places. This comparison with generative memory and processing in the human brain has interesting implications for the further development of generative AI and for neuroscience research.

Indexed as

Chat-GPTEpisodic memoryGenerative artificial intelligenceGenerative Pre-trained TransformerHippocampal memory systemSemantic memoryThe brain and AI

Identifiers

PMID38841455
PMCPMC11152951

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.