ArticlePLoS computational biology2023
Adaptive oscillators support Bayesian prediction in temporal 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 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Simulated field potentials capture multiple simultaneous processes underlying human temporal attention.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Neural rhythms as priors of speech computations.Patterns (New York, N.Y.) · 2026Article
- Computational modeling of rhythmic expectations: Perspectives, pitfalls, and prospects.PLoS computational biology · 2025Review
- Human brain integrates both unconditional and conditional timing statistics to guide expectation and behavior.PLoS biology · 2025Article
- Challenges and Approaches in the Study of Neural Entrainment.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2024Review
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 at 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Humans excel at predictively synchronizing their behavior with external rhythms, as in dance or music performance. The neural processes underlying rhythmic inferences are debated: whether predictive perception relies on high-level generative models or whether it can readily be implemented locally by hard-coded intrinsic oscillators synchronizing to rhythmic input remains unclear and different underlying computational mechanisms have been proposed. Here we explore human perception for tone sequences with some temporal regularity at varying rates, but with considerable variability. Next, using a dynamical systems perspective, we successfully model the participants behavior using an adaptive frequency oscillator which adjusts its spontaneous frequency based on the rate of stimuli. This model better reflects human behavior than a canonical nonlinear oscillator and a predictive ramping model-both widely used for temporal estimation and prediction-and demonstrate that the classical distinction between absolute and relative computational mechanisms can be unified under this framework. In addition, we show that neural oscillators may constitute hard-coded physiological priors-in a Bayesian sense-that reduce temporal uncertainty and facilitate the predictive processing of noisy rhythms. Together, the results show that adaptive oscillators provide an elegant and biologically plausible means to subserve rhythmic inference, reconciling previously incompatible frameworks for temporal inferential processes.
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.