ArticleThe European journal of neuroscience2021
Bayesian models of human navigation behaviour in an augmented reality audiomaze.
Article in The European journal of neuroscience, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bayesian models of human navigation behaviour in an augmented reality audiomaze.The European journal of neuroscience · 2021Article
- Time to move: Brain dynamics underlying natural action and cognition.The European journal of neuroscience · 2021Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We investigated Bayesian modelling of human whole-body motion capture data recorded during an exploratory real-space navigation task in an "Audiomaze" environment (see the companion paper by Miyakoshi et al. in the same volume) to study the effect of map learning on navigation behaviour. There were three models, a feedback-only model (no map learning), a map resetting model (single-trial limited map learning), and a map updating model (map learning accumulated across three trials). The estimated behavioural variables included step sizes and turning angles. Results showed that the estimated step sizes were constantly more accurate using the map learning models than the feedback-only model. The same effect was confirmed for turning angle estimates, but only for data from the third trial. We interpreted these results as Bayesian evidence of human map learning on navigation behaviour. Furthermore, separating the participants into groups of egocentric and allocentric navigators revealed an advantage for the map updating model in estimating step sizes, but only for the allocentric navigators. This interaction indicated that the allocentric navigators may take more advantage of map learning than do egocentric navigators. We discuss relationships of these results to simultaneous localization and mapping (SLAM) problem.
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.