ArticleeLife2026
A unifying account of replay as context-driven memory reactivation.
Article in eLife, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Data augmentation as a framework for modeling hippocampal contributions to generalization.ArXiv · 2026Article
- Two-factor synaptic plasticity enables memory consolidation during neuronal burst firing.PNAS nexus · 2026Article
- Article
- Specialized recall procedures.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2026Review
- Between planning and map building: Prioritizing replay when future goals are uncertain.Neuron · 2025Review
- Sequence-to-sequence models with attention mechanistically map to the architecture of human memory search.Communications psychology · 2025Article
- Spontaneous reinstatement of episodic memories in the developing human brain.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Prioritizing replay when future goals are unknown.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
During rest and sleep, sequential neural activation patterns corresponding to awake experience re-emerge, and this replay has been shown to benefit subsequent behavior and memory. Whereas some studies show that replay directly recapitulates recent experience, others demonstrate that replay systematically deviates from the temporal structure, the statistics, and even the content of recent experience. Given these disparate characteristics, what is the nature and purpose of replay? Here, we offer a theoretical framework in which replay reflects simple context-guided processes that facilitate memory. We suggest that during awake learning, the brain associates experiences with the contexts in which they are encoded, at encoding rates that vary according to the salience of each experience. During quiescence, replay emerges as the result of a cascade of autonomous bidirectional interactions between contexts and their associated experiences, which in turn facilitates memory consolidation. A computational model instantiating this proposal explains numerous replay phenomena, including findings that existing models fail to account for and observations that have been predominantly construed through the lens of reinforcement learning. Our theory provides a unified, mechanistic framework of how the brain initially encodes and subsequently replays experiences in the service of memory consolidation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.