ArticlePLoS computational biology2023
Rhythmic modulation of prediction errors: A top-down gating role for the beta-range in speech processing.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- The primate claustrum as a hub for precision weighting of prediction errors across the cortical hierarchy.PLoS biology · 2026Article
- Speech Perception and Preparation Are Supported by Distinct Neural Dynamics Across Development.Neurobiology of language (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2026Article
- Differential effects of external noise and situational interest on neurophysiological responses during video based learning.NPJ science of learning · 2025Article
- Neural manifolds carry reactivation of phonetic representations during semantic processing.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
- A deep hierarchy of predictions enables online meaning extraction in a computational model of human speech comprehension.PLoS biology · 2023Article
- Oscillatory and gaze signatures of socio-emotional speech processing, visuo-spatial cognition, and their interaction in a near-realistic dual-task MEG study.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)Article
- Can youImaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Natural speech perception requires processing the ongoing acoustic input while keeping in mind the preceding one and predicting the next. This complex computational problem could be handled by a dynamic multi-timescale hierarchical inferential process that coordinates the information flow up and down the language network hierarchy. Using a predictive coding computational model (Precoss-β) that identifies online individual syllables from continuous speech, we address the advantage of a rhythmic modulation of up and down information flows, and whether beta oscillations could be optimal for this. In the model, and consistent with experimental data, theta and low-gamma neural frequency scales ensure syllable-tracking and phoneme-level speech encoding, respectively, while the beta rhythm is associated with inferential processes. We show that a rhythmic alternation of bottom-up and top-down processing regimes improves syllable recognition, and that optimal efficacy is reached when the alternation of bottom-up and top-down regimes, via oscillating prediction error precisions, is in the beta range (around 20-30 Hz). These results not only demonstrate the advantage of a rhythmic alternation of up- and down-going information, but also that the low-beta range is optimal given sensory analysis at theta and low-gamma scales. While specific to speech processing, the notion of alternating bottom-up and top-down processes with frequency multiplexing might generalize to other cognitive architectures.
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.