Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38150480›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2023

Metric information in cognitive maps: Euclidean embedding of non-Euclidean environments.

Tristan Baumann, Hanspeter A Mallot

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. 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

2 authors.

Tristan BaumannComputational Neuroscience, Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Tübingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-4855-3512
Hanspeter A MallotCognitive Neuroscience Unit, Department of Biology, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-4208-4348

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The structure of the internal representation of surrounding space, the so-called cognitive map, has long been debated. A Euclidean metric map is the most straight-forward hypothesis, but human navigation has been shown to systematically deviate from the Euclidean ground truth. Vector navigation based on non-metric models can better explain the observed behavior, but also discards useful geometric properties such as fast shortcut estimation and cue integration. Here, we propose another alternative, a Euclidean metric map that is systematically distorted to account for the observed behavior. The map is found by embedding the non-metric model, a labeled graph, into 2D Euclidean coordinates. We compared these two models using data from a human behavioral study where participants had to learn and navigate a non-Euclidean maze (i.e., with wormholes) and perform direct shortcuts between different locations. Even though the Euclidean embedding cannot correctly represent the non-Euclidean environment, both models predicted the data equally well. We argue that the embedding naturally arises from integrating the local position information into a metric framework, which makes the model more powerful and robust than the non-metric alternative. It may therefore be a better model for the human cognitive map.

Indexed as

CognitionLearningHumans

Identifiers

PMID38150480
PMCPMC10775987

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.