ArticleeLife2020
Reinforcement regulates timing variability in thalamus.
Article in eLife, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Awareness of both global uncertainty and feedback in human time estimation.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2025Article
- Control Principles of Neural Dynamics Revealed by the Neurobiology of Timing.Annual review of neuroscience · 2025Review
- Keeping time and rhythm by internal simulation of sensory stimuli and behavioral actions.Science advances · 2024Article
- The temporal context in bayesian models of interval timing: Recent advances and future directions.Behavioral neuroscience · 2022Article
- A proxy measure of striatal dopamine predicts individual differences in temporal precision.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2022Article
- Rodents monitor their error in self-generated duration on a single trial basis.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022Article
- Thalamic subnetworks as units of function.Nature neuroscience · 2022Review
- A neural network model for timing control with reinforcement.Frontiers in computational neuroscience · 2022Article
- A precise and adaptive neural mechanism for predictive temporal processing in the frontal cortex.Neuron · 2021Article
- The Central Thalamus: Gatekeeper or Processing Hub?The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2021Article
- Awareness of errors and feedback in human time estimation.Learning & memory (Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y.) · 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
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Learning reduces variability but variability can facilitate learning. This paradoxical relationship has made it challenging to tease apart sources of variability that degrade performance from those that improve it. We tackled this question in a context-dependent timing task requiring humans and monkeys to flexibly produce different time intervals with different effectors. We identified two opposing factors contributing to timing variability: slow memory fluctuation that degrades performance and reward-dependent exploratory behavior that improves performance. Signatures of these opposing factors were evident across populations of neurons in the dorsomedial frontal cortex (DMFC), DMFC-projecting neurons in the ventrolateral thalamus, and putative target of DMFC in the caudate. However, only in the thalamus were the performance-optimizing regulation of variability aligned to the slow performance-degrading memory fluctuations. These findings reveal how variability caused by exploratory behavior might help to mitigate other undesirable sources of variability and highlight a potential role for thalamocortical projections in this process.
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.