ArticleNature communications2026
Human learning of probability distributions is biased toward moderate structural complexity.
Article in Nature communications, 2026. 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
Inferring hidden environmental structures, which commonly involves learning arbitrary probability distributions from limited samples, is essential to optimal and adaptive behaviors across various cognitive domains. However, it remains largely unknown how the internal representations constructed by humans may deviate from actual probabilistic structures, and what computational processes, operated under inherent cognitive limitations, give rise to these representations. We first develop a structured distribution report task to reveal human participants' internal representations, with findings verified in a further distribution recognition task. Across eight behavioral experiments (including one pre-registered study) in two modalities, participants estimate the overall probability density reasonably well, but exhibit a systematic bias toward moderate structural complexity, reporting too many clusters when the true distribution is a single Gaussian and too few when it contains many clusters. We then build a series of learning models in the framework of approximate Bayesian inference fit to our behavioral data. Through model comparisons, we reconstruct the prior beliefs guiding the evolution of participants' internal representations. The best-fitting model for human reports reduces structure growth rate as complexity increases, effectively constraining the complexity of internal representations within memory limitations.
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.