Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40690484›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2025

Disentangling signal and noise in neural responses through generative modeling.

Kendrick Kay, Jacob S Prince, Thomas Gebhart, Greta Tuckute, Jingyang Zhou, Thomas Naselaris, Heiko H Schütt

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Kendrick KayCenter for Magnetic Resonance Research (CMRR), Department of Radiology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-6604-9155
Jacob S PrinceDepartment of Psychology, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-6169-9503
Thomas GebhartDepartment of Computer Science, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States of America.
Greta TuckuteDepartment of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-5572-5469
Jingyang ZhouCenter for Computational Neuroscience (CCN), Flatiron Institute, New York, New York, United States of America.
Thomas NaselarisCenter for Magnetic Resonance Research (CMRR), Department of Radiology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States of America.
Heiko H SchüttDepartment of Behavioural and Cognitive Sciences, Université du Luxembourg, Esch-Belval Esch-sur-Alzette, Luxembourg.ORCID 0000-0002-2491-5710

Funding

Deep sampling of cognitive effects in the human visual systemR01EY034118 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA · PI CLAYTON E CURTIS, Kendrick Norris Kay · 2023 to 2026
$1.9M
NEI NIH HHS R01 EY034118
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Measurements of neural responses to identically repeated experimental events often exhibit large amounts of variability. This noise is distinct from signal, operationally defined as the average expected response across repeated trials for each given event. Accurately distinguishing signal from noise is important, as each is a target that is worthy of study (many believe noise reflects important aspects of brain function) and it is important not to confuse one for the other. Here, we describe a principled modeling approach in which response measurements are explicitly modeled as the sum of samples from multivariate signal and noise distributions. In our proposed method-termed Generative Modeling of Signal and Noise (GSN)-the signal distribution is estimated by subtracting the estimated noise distribution from the estimated data distribution. Importantly, GSN improves estimates of the signal distribution, but does not provide improved estimates of responses to individual events. We validate GSN using ground-truth simulations and show that it compares favorably with related methods. We also demonstrate the application of GSN to empirical fMRI data to illustrate a simple consequence of GSN: by disentangling signal and noise components in neural responses, GSN denoises principal components analysis and improves estimates of dimensionality. We end by discussing other situations that may benefit from GSN's characterization of signal and noise, such as estimation of noise ceilings for computational models of neural activity. A code toolbox for GSN is provided with both MATLAB and Python implementations.

Indexed as

BrainModels, NeurologicalAlgorithmsComputational BiologyComputer SimulationHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingPrincipal Component AnalysisSignal-To-Noise Ratio

Identifiers

PMID40690484
PMCPMC12289057

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.