ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2026
Sensory integration, temporal prediction, and rule discovery reflect interdependent inference processes.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Sensory integration, temporal prediction, and rule discovery reflect interdependent inference processes.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
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
Deciphering the structure of variable sensory input is key to building an accurate model of one's environment. Humans can accumulate evidence from sequences of stimuli to estimate their sensory statistics, predict the timing of upcoming stimuli, but also discover rules governing sequence generation. However, whether these three forms of inference operate independently or synergistically remains untested. Here, we report selective interactions between sensory integration, temporal prediction, and rule discovery in humans. Participants were exposed to rhythmic sequences of 10 stimuli governed or not by a latent rule-a predictable change in stimulus statistics after five stimuli-and then asked to predict the 10th stimulus from incomplete sequences. Individual differences in sensory integration timescale for rule-free sequences predicted efficient rule discovery. Conversely, discovering the latent rule shaped the timescale and format of sensory integration for rule-based sequences. Tampering with the rhythmicity of stimulus presentation impaired rule discovery without affecting sensory integration accuracy. Selective perturbations of recurrent neural networks trained in the same conditions confirmed these specific interactions. Together, these findings provide insights into the flexibility of human inferences based on variable yet predictable sensory input.
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.