Cited by 27Visual perception and processing mechanismsMultisensory perception and integrationNeural dynamics and brain function

Proscription supports robust perceptual integration by suppression in human visual cortex

Open access
Rideaux, Reuben, Welchman, Andrew E.·2018·Nature Communications

Abstract

Perception relies on integrating information within and between the senses, but how does the brain decide which pieces of information should be integrated and which kept separate? Here we demonstrate how proscription can be used to solve this problem: certain neurons respond best to unrealistic combinations of features to provide ‘what not’ information that drives suppression of unlikely perceptual interpretations. First, we present a model that captures both improved perception when signals are consistent (and thus should be integrated) and robust estimation when signals are conflicting. Second, we test for signatures of proscription in the human brain. We show that concentrations of inhibitory neurotransmitter GABA in a brain region intricately involved in integrating cues (V3B/KO) correlate with robust integration. Finally, we show that perturbing excitation/inhibition impairs integration. These results highlight the role of proscription in robust perception and demonstrate the functional purpose of ‘what not’ sensors in supporting sensory estimation.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41467-018-03400-y

Cites

76 of 76 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Previous theoretical modeling work indicated that opposite neurons in macaque MSTd may be involved in segregating sensory cues.

    “Previous theoretical modeling work has indicated that opposite neurons in macaque MSTd may be involved in segregating sensory cues (22, 32, 33).”

    From How multisensory neurons solve causal inference. (2021) · cites this paper as [22]

    The Results (Derivation of the proscriptive integration model; page unavailable) model incongruent-cue units, and the Discussion says such signals can account for cases of complete cue scission. The paper cites evidence that similar neurons exist in primates, including a macaque MSTd study, but it does not model MSTd neurons specifically or establish their role in segregating cues. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rideaux, R., & Welchman, A. E.
Affiliations
University of Cambridge (GB)
Corresponding author
Welchman, Andrew E.
Venue
Nature Communications
Published
2018-04-17
Volume
9
Issue
1
Pages
1502-1502
ISSN
2041-1723 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2791175239
Cited by
27
References
76
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 1
FWCI
2.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Communications (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • University of Birmingham Research Portal (University of Birmingham) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Apollo (University of Cambridge) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Apollo (cc-by)
Funders
Wellcome Trust (095183, 095183/Z/10/Z)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Multisensory perception and integration
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
Keywords
proscription, perceptual integration, sensory integration, GABA, excitation-inhibition balance, visual cortex, robust perception, neural suppression
MeSH terms
Adult, Cues, Electric Stimulation, Evoked Potentials, Visual, Female, gamma-Aminobutyric Acid, Humans, Male, Models, Neurological, Neurons, Photic Stimulation, Visual Cortex, Visual Perception, Young Adult, Functional Neuroimaging

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review