ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2025
Representational geometry explains puzzling error distributions in behavioral tasks.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2025. 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.
- Identifiability of Bayesian models of perception.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- Developmental tuning of functional manifold dimensionality across the human brain.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Article
- The neural basis of swap errors in working memory.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Measuring and interpreting errors in behavioral tasks is critical for understanding cognition. Conventional wisdom assumes that encoding/decoding errors for continuous variables in behavioral tasks should naturally have Gaussian distributions, so that deviations from normality in the empirical data indicate the presence of more complex sources of noise. This line of reasoning has been central for prior research on working memory. Here, we reassess this assumption and find that even in ideal observer models with Gaussian encoding noise, the error distribution is generally non-Gaussian, contrary to the commonly held belief. Critically, we find that the shape of the error distribution is determined by the geometrical structure of the encoding manifold via a simple rule. In the case of a high-dimensional geometry, the error distributions naturally exhibit flat tails. Using this insight, we apply our theory to visual short-term memory tasks, and find that it can account for a large array of experimental data with only two free parameters. Our results challenge the dominant view in the mechanisms and capacity constraints of working memory systems. They instead suggest that the Bayesian framework, which explains various aspects of perceptual behavior, also provides an excellent account of working memory. Overall, our results establish a direct connection between neural manifold geometry and behavior, and call attention to the geometry of the representation as a critically important, yet underappreciated factor in determining the character of errors in human behavior.
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.