ArticlePLoS computational biology2024
Learning probability distributions of sensory inputs with Monte Carlo predictive coding.
Article in PLoS computational 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.
- Neural Associative Skill Memories for Safer Robotics and Modeling Human Sensorimotor Repertoires.Neural computation · 2025Article
- Brain-like variational inference.ArXiv · 2025Article
- Confidence and second-order errors in cortical circuits.PNAS nexus · 2024Article
- Neuron-level Prediction and Noise can Implement Flexible Reward-Seeking Behavior.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
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
Abstract
It has been suggested that the brain employs probabilistic generative models to optimally interpret sensory information. This hypothesis has been formalised in distinct frameworks, focusing on explaining separate phenomena. On one hand, classic predictive coding theory proposed how the probabilistic models can be learned by networks of neurons employing local synaptic plasticity. On the other hand, neural sampling theories have demonstrated how stochastic dynamics enable neural circuits to represent the posterior distributions of latent states of the environment. These frameworks were brought together by variational filtering that introduced neural sampling to predictive coding. Here, we consider a variant of variational filtering for static inputs, to which we refer as Monte Carlo predictive coding (MCPC). We demonstrate that the integration of predictive coding with neural sampling results in a neural network that learns precise generative models using local computation and plasticity. The neural dynamics of MCPC infer the posterior distributions of the latent states in the presence of sensory inputs, and can generate likely inputs in their absence. Furthermore, MCPC captures the experimental observations on the variability of neural activity during perceptual tasks. By combining predictive coding and neural sampling, MCPC can account for both sets of neural data that previously had been explained by these individual frameworks.
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.