ReviewPhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2020
Structured sequence processing and combinatorial binding: neurobiologically and computationally informed hypotheses.
Review in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- The physiology of interoception and its adaptive role in consciousness.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2025Review
- What neural oscillations can and cannot do for syntactic structure building.Nature reviews. Neuroscience · 2023Review
- Vector Symbolic Architectures as a Computing Framework for Emerging Hardware.Proceedings of the IEEE. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers · 2022Article
- Modelling meaning composition from formalism to mechanism.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Understanding how the brain forms representations of structured information distributed in time is a challenging endeavour for the neuroscientific community, requiring computationally and neurobiologically informed approaches. The neural mechanisms for segmenting continuous streams of sensory input and establishing representations of dependencies remain largely unknown, as do the transformations and computations occurring between the brain regions involved in these aspects of sequence processing. We propose a blueprint for a neurobiologically informed and informing computational model of sequence processing (entitled: Vector-symbolic Sequencing of Binding INstantiating Dependencies, or VS-BIND). This model is designed to support the transformation of serially ordered elements in sensory sequences into structured representations of bound dependencies, readily operates on multiple timescales, and encodes or decodes sequences with respect to chunked items wherever dependencies occur in time. The model integrates established vector symbolic additive and conjunctive binding operators with neurobiologically plausible oscillatory dynamics, and is compatible with modern spiking neural network simulation methods. We show that the model is capable of simulating previous findings from structured sequence processing tasks that engage fronto-temporal regions, specifying mechanistic roles for regions such as prefrontal areas 44/45 and the frontal operculum during interactions with sensory representations in temporal cortex. Finally, we are able to make predictions based on the configuration of the model alone that underscore the importance of serial position information, which requires input from time-sensitive cells, known to reside in the hippocampus and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. This article is part of the theme issue 'Towards mechanistic models of meaning composition'.
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.