ReviewThe Journal of physiology2016
Optimal cue combination and landmark-stability learning in the head direction system.
Review in The Journal of physiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- Continuous attractor dynamics in spatial navigation: from population geometry to flexible computation.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026Review
- Article
- Rotating visual spaces induce behavioral biases consistent with recalibrated heading integration in humans.iScience · 2025Article
- Explicit error coding can mediate gain recalibration in continuous bump attractor networks.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Allocentric flocking.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Synaptic ring attractor: A unified framework for attractor dynamics and multiple cues integration.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Disentangling reference frames in the neural compass.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2024Article
- Weighted cue integration for straight-line orientation.iScience · 2022Article
- Attractor-like Dynamics in the Subicular Complex.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2022Article
- Combination and competition between path integration and landmark navigation in the estimation of heading direction.PLoS computational biology · 2022Article
- Human cortical dynamics during full-body heading changes.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- A decentralised neural model explaining optimal integration of navigational strategies in insects.eLife · 2020Article
- Testing the Efficacy of Single-Cell Stimulation in Biasing Presubicular Head Direction Activity.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2018Article
- Retrosplenial cortex and its role in spatial cognition.Brain and neuroscience advances · 2018Review
- Efficacy of navigation may be influenced by retrosplenial cortex-mediated learning of landmark stability.Neuropsychologia · 2017Article
- Neural mechanisms for spatial computation.The Journal of physiology · 2016Article
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
Maintaining a sense of direction requires combining information from static environmental landmarks with dynamic information about self-motion. This is accomplished by the head direction system, whose neurons - head direction cells - encode specific head directions. When the brain integrates information in sensory domains, this process is almost always 'optimal' - that is, inputs are weighted according to their reliability. Evidence suggests cue combination by head direction cells may also be optimal. The simplicity of the head direction signal, together with the detailed knowledge we have about the anatomy and physiology of the underlying circuit, therefore makes this system a tractable model with which to discover how optimal cue combination occurs at a neural level. In the head direction system, cue interactions are thought to occur on an attractor network of interacting head direction neurons, but attractor dynamics predict a winner-take-all decision between cues, rather than optimal combination. However, optimal cue combination in an attractor could be achieved via plasticity in the feedforward connections from external sensory cues (i.e. the landmarks) onto the ring attractor. Short-term plasticity would allow rapid re-weighting that adjusts the final state of the network in accordance with cue reliability (reflected in the connection strengths), while longer term plasticity would allow long-term learning about this reliability. Although these principles were derived to model the head direction system, they could potentially serve to explain optimal cue combination in other sensory systems more generally.
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.