ArticleeLife2020
Using the past to estimate sensory uncertainty.
Article in eLife, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Explaining attractive and repulsive biases in the subjective visual vertical.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
- Perceived Multisensory Common Cause Relations Shape the Ventriloquism Effect but Only Marginally the Trial-Wise Aftereffect.The European journal of neuroscience · 2025Article
- The interplay of uncertainty, relevance and learning influences auditory categorization.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Individual Differences in Bodily Self-Consciousness and Its Neural Basis.Brain sciences · 2024Review
- Profile of Sensory Integration Disorders in Migraine Patients-New Perspectives of Therapy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Article
- Modeling facial perception in group context from a serial perception perspective.Journal of vision · 2023Article
- Cumulative multisensory discrepancies shape the ventriloquism aftereffect but not the ventriloquism bias.PloS one · 2023Article
- Article
- The temporal context in bayesian models of interval timing: Recent advances and future directions.Behavioral neuroscience · 2022Article
- The Neurophysiological Basis of the Trial-Wise and Cumulative Ventriloquism Aftereffects.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2021Article
- Using the past to estimate sensory uncertainty.eLife · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
To form a more reliable percept of the environment, the brain needs to estimate its own sensory uncertainty. Current theories of perceptual inference assume that the brain computes sensory uncertainty instantaneously and independently for each stimulus. We evaluated this assumption in four psychophysical experiments, in which human observers localized auditory signals that were presented synchronously with spatially disparate visual signals. Critically, the visual noise changed dynamically over time continuously or with intermittent jumps. Our results show that observers integrate audiovisual inputs weighted by sensory uncertainty estimates that combine information from past and current signals consistent with an optimal Bayesian learner that can be approximated by exponential discounting. Our results challenge leading models of perceptual inference where sensory uncertainty estimates depend only on the current stimulus. They demonstrate that the brain capitalizes on the temporal dynamics of the external world and estimates sensory uncertainty by combining past experiences with new incoming sensory signals.
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.