Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38849521›Full record

ArticleNature neuroscience2024

A recurrent network model of planning explains hippocampal replay and human behavior.

Kristopher T Jensen, Guillaume Hennequin, Marcelo G Mattar

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature neuroscience, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing 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

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Planning in the Brain: It's Not What You Think It Is.Annual review of neuroscience · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Meta-learning is expressed through altered prefrontal cortical dynamics.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  6. Learning to select computations in recurrent neural circuits.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Octopamine instructs head direction plasticity.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Reasoning with programs in replay.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  14. Behavioral Timing of Interictal Spikes, But Not Rate, Correlates with Impaired Working Memory Performance.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Adaptive planning depth in human problem-solving.Royal Society open science · 2025
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Flexible inference for animal learning rules using neural networks.Advances in neural information processing systems · 2025
    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.

Kristopher T JensenComputational and Biological Learning Lab, Department of Engineering, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK. kris.torp.jensen@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9242-5572
Guillaume HennequinComputational and Biological Learning Lab, Department of Engineering, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7296-6870
Marcelo G MattarDepartment of Cognitive Science, University of California, San Diego, CA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3303-2490

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

When faced with a novel situation, people often spend substantial periods of time contemplating possible futures. For such planning to be rational, the benefits to behavior must compensate for the time spent thinking. Here, we capture these features of behavior by developing a neural network model where planning itself is controlled by the prefrontal cortex. This model consists of a meta-reinforcement learning agent augmented with the ability to plan by sampling imagined action sequences from its own policy, which we call 'rollouts'. In a spatial navigation task, the agent learns to plan when it is beneficial, which provides a normative explanation for empirical variability in human thinking times. Additionally, the patterns of policy rollouts used by the artificial agent closely resemble patterns of rodent hippocampal replays. Our work provides a theory of how the brain could implement planning through prefrontal-hippocampal interactions, where hippocampal replays are triggered by-and adaptively affect-prefrontal dynamics.

Indexed as

HippocampusNeural Networks, ComputerPrefrontal CortexAnimalsHumansModels, NeurologicalReinforcement, PsychologySpatial NavigationThinking

Identifiers

PMID38849521
PMCPMC11239510

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.