ArticleNature communications2026
Cortical knowledge structures guide word concept learning.
Article in Nature communications, 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.
- Superoxide dismutase in intervertebral disc degeneration: from pathophysiological mechanism to therapeutic strategies.Molecular biology reports · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Human word concept learning leverages prior knowledge to generalize from limited exemplars, yet its neural implementation remains unclear. We developed a Neural Bayesian Model (NBM) that incorporates neural representational priors to explain word concept learning. Using fMRI, we first constructed a neural prior space from activity elicited by familiar objects (with novel shapes as controls), and then examined neural responses during novel word concept learning based on these objects. The NBM integrating priors from ventral occipitotemporal cortex predicted both neural representations and behavioral generalization, outperforming control models lacking neural priors. In contrast, hippocampal activity supported learning for novel shapes without benefit from the NBM, consistent with prior-free associative mechanisms. Large language models showed weaker alignment with human generalization patterns. These findings dissociate prior-based cortical inference from hippocampal exemplar-associative learning, providing a neural instantiation of Bayesian concept acquisition and clarifying the interplay between semantic and episodic memory systems.
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.