Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41823804›Full record

ReviewBiology2026

Coupling Causal Inference and Cross-Modal Recalibration: A Unified Framework for Adaptive Multisensory Perception.

Jing Liu, Chu-Chung Huang, Fu Zeng

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Jing LiuKey Laboratory of Brain Functional Genomics (Ministry of Education), East China Normal University, Shanghai 200062, China.
Chu-Chung HuangKey Laboratory of Brain Functional Genomics (Ministry of Education), East China Normal University, Shanghai 200062, China.
Fu ZengKey Laboratory of Brain Functional Genomics (Ministry of Education), East China Normal University, Shanghai 200062, China.

Funding

Fu Zeng The National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 32400826) and China Postdoctoral Science Foundation under Grant (2024M760927)
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Perception in natural environments relies on the integration of information from multiple sensory modalities. Although combining sensory cues can improve perceptual accuracy, sensory signals are inherently noisy and do not always arise from a common source. As a result, the brain must continuously determine whether multisensory signals should be integrated or segregated, while also adapting sensory representations when discrepancies persist over time. Multisensory causal inference provides a principled framework of how the brain infers the causal structure underlying sensory inputs and flexibly arbitrates between integration and segregation. In parallel, extensive behavioral work has shown that prolonged exposure to cross-modal conflicts induces multisensory recalibration, leading to persistent changes in unisensory and multisensory perception. Despite progress in both areas, the relationship between causal inference and recalibration has remained unclear. In this review, we synthesize behavioral, computational, and neurophysiological evidence to argue that causal inference and recalibration form a coupled adaptive system operating across distinct time scales. We propose that causal inference constrains whether sensory discrepancies drive recalibration, whereas recalibration reshapes sensory representations and expectations, thereby influencing future causal judgments.

Indexed as

Bayesian causal inferencecross-modalmultisensory perceptionneural plasticityrecalibration

Identifiers

PMID41823804
PMCPMC12984862

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.