Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36655988›Full record

ArticleCognitive science2023

Finding Hierarchical Structure in Binary Sequences: Evidence from Lindenmayer Grammar Learning.

Samuel Schmid, Douglas Saddy, Julie Franck

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cognitive science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Samuel SchmidFaculty of Psychology, University of Geneva.
Douglas SaddyCentre for Integrative Neuroscience and Neurodynamics, University of Reading.
Julie FranckFaculty of Psychology, University of Geneva.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this article, we explore the extraction of recursive nested structure in the processing of binary sequences. Our aim was to determine whether humans learn the higher-order regularities of a highly simplified input where only sequential-order information marks the hierarchical structure. To this end, we implemented a sequence generated by the Fibonacci grammar in a serial reaction time task. This deterministic grammar generates aperiodic but self-similar sequences. The combination of these two properties allowed us to evaluate hierarchical learning while controlling for the use of low-level strategies like detecting recurring patterns. The deterministic aspect of the grammar allowed us to predict precisely which points in the sequence should be subject to anticipation. Results showed that participants' pattern of anticipation could not be accounted for by "flat" statistical learning processes and was consistent with them anticipating upcoming points based on hierarchical assumptions. We also found that participants were sensitive to the structure constituency, suggesting that they organized the signal into embedded constituents. We hypothesized that the participants built this structure by merging recursively deterministic transitions.

Indexed as

Deep LearningLearningHumansLinguisticsReaction TimeArtificial grammar learningFibonacciHierarchical representationsL-systemsNested structureRecursionSelf-similaritySerial reaction times

Identifiers

PMID36655988
PMCPMC10078511

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.