ArticleeLife2025
Learning and cognition in highspeed decision making.
Article in eLife, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 is widely accepted that more time and information yield better decisions. However, some decisions manage to be extremely fast and yet accurate. The trick of such highspeed decisions appears to be the use of simplifying heuristics that works well for the most common condition but lacks flexibility otherwise. Here, we describe an unexpected level of flexibility in a complex highspeed decision that is made faster than an Olympic sprinter can respond to the start gun. In this decision, archerfish observe the initial speed, direction, and height of falling prey and then use these initial values to turn right towards where ballistically falling prey would later land. To analyze the limits in flexibility of this highspeed decision, we developed and critically tested a system that allowed us to replace the usual ballistic relation between initial prey motion and the expected landing point with another deterministic rule. We discovered that, surprisingly, adult fish could reprogram their highspeed decision to the new rule. Moreover, after reprogramming their decision fish were immediately able to generalize their decision to novel untrained settings, showing a remarkable degree of abstraction in how the decision circuit represented the novel rule. The decision circuit is even capable of simultaneously using two distinct sets of rules, one for each of two visually distinct objects. The flexibility and level of cognition are unexpected for a decision that lacks a speed-accuracy tradeoff and is made in less than 100 ms. Our findings demonstrate the enormous potential highspeed decision making can have and strongly suggest that we presently underappreciate this form of decision making.
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.