ReviewAdvances in experimental medicine and biology2024
Neurocomputational Models of Interval Timing: Seeing the Forest for the Trees.
Review in Advances in experimental medicine and biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Communication between the medial frontal cortex and mediodorsal thalamus is required for timing performance in rats.Neurobiology of learning and memory · 2026Article
- Midbrain Dopamine Warps Subjective Time via Threshold Setting But Not Clock Speed.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2026Article
- A drift-diffusion model of temporal generalization outperforms existing models and captures modality differences and learning effects.Behavior research methods · 2025Article
- Motor Preparation Tracks Decision Boundary Crossing Rather Than Accumulated Evidence in Temporal Decision-Making.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Extracting temporal regularities and relations from experience/observation is critical for organisms' adaptiveness (communication, foraging, predation, prediction) in their ecological niches. Therefore, it is not surprising that the internal clock that enables the perception of seconds-to-minutes-long intervals (interval timing) is evolutionarily well-preserved across many species of animals. This comparative claim is primarily supported by the fact that the timing behavior of many vertebrates exhibits common statistical signatures (e.g., on-average accuracy, scalar variability, positive skew). These ubiquitous statistical features of timing behaviors serve as empirical benchmarks for modelers in their efforts to unravel the processing dynamics of the internal clock (namely answering how internal clock "ticks"). In this chapter, we introduce prominent (neuro)computational approaches to modeling interval timing at a level that can be understood by general audience. These models include Treisman's pacemaker accumulator model, the information processing variant of scalar expectancy theory, the striatal beat frequency model, behavioral expectancy theory, the learning to time model, the time-adaptive opponent Poisson drift-diffusion model, time cell models, and neural trajectory models. Crucially, we discuss these models within an overarching conceptual framework that categorizes different models as threshold vs. clock-adaptive models and as dedicated clock/ramping vs. emergent time/population code models.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38918346What 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.