Cited by 136Neural dynamics and brain functionFunctional Brain Connectivity StudiesNeuroscience and Music Perception

The Brain Ages Optimally to Model Its Environment: Evidence from Sensory Learning over the Adult Lifespan

Open access
Moran, Rosalyn J., Symmonds, Mkael, Dolan, Raymond J., Friston, Karl J.·2014·PLoS Computational Biology

Abstract

The aging brain shows a progressive loss of neuropil, which is accompanied by subtle changes in neuronal plasticity, sensory learning and memory. Neurophysiologically, aging attenuates evoked responses--including the mismatch negativity (MMN). This is accompanied by a shift in cortical responsivity from sensory (posterior) regions to executive (anterior) regions, which has been interpreted as a compensatory response for cognitive decline. Theoretical neurobiology offers a simpler explanation for all of these effects--from a Bayesian perspective, as the brain is progressively optimized to model its world, its complexity will decrease. A corollary of this complexity reduction is an attenuation of Bayesian updating or sensory learning. Here we confirmed this hypothesis using magnetoencephalographic recordings of the mismatch negativity elicited in a large cohort of human subjects, in their third to ninth decade. Employing dynamic causal modeling to assay the synaptic mechanisms underlying these non-invasive recordings, we found a selective age-related attenuation of synaptic connectivity changes that underpin rapid sensory learning. In contrast, baseline synaptic connectivity strengths were consistently strong over the decades. Our findings suggest that the lifetime accrual of sensory experience optimizes functional brain architectures to enable efficient and generalizable predictions of the world.

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 · 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003422

Cites

57 of 57 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?

  • Visual information can reach the primary visual cortex as early as ~60 ms after stimulus onset.

    “The 60-ms lower bound reflects previous findings that visual information can reach the primary visual cortex as early as ~60 ms after stimulus onset68.”

    From Deviations in effective connectivity explain different hallucination subtypes in Parkinson's disease psychosis (2026) · cites this paper as [68]

    The Methods (Dynamic Causal Modeling; page unavailable) specify a 64-ms prior onset for auditory input to Heschl’s gyrus, not visual input to primary visual cortex. The Results (Dynamic Causal Modeling of Sensory Evoked Responses; page unavailable) likewise concern auditory tones. Searches for visual-cortex responses and a 60-ms visual onset found no passage addressing the claim. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    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
Moran, R. J., Symmonds, M., Dolan, R. J., & Friston, K. J.
Affiliations
  • Virginia Tech (US)
  • Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging (GB)
Corresponding author
Moran, Rosalyn J.
Venue
PLoS Computational Biology
Published
2014-01-23
Volume
10
Issue
1
Pages
e1003422
ISSN
  • 1553-734X (ISSN-L)
  • 1553-7358
OpenAlex
W2086508845
Cited by
136
References
57
Citations by year
2026: 16 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 3
FWCI
5.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS Computational Biology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Max Planck Digital Library (submittedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion)
  • Bristol Research (University of Bristol) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Wellcome Trust (091593, 091593/Z/10/, 098362, 098362/Z/12/Z, 091593/Z/10/Z, 088130, 098362/Z/12/)
  • Academy of Medical Sciences (AMS-SGCL9-Symmonds)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Music Perception
Keywords
brain aging, mismatch negativity, sensory learning, Bayesian brain, synaptic connectivity, dynamic causal modeling, evoked potentials, cognitive decline, complexity reduction, adult lifespan, magnetoencephalography
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Aging, Algorithms, Auditory Cortex, Bayes Theorem, Brain, Brain Mapping, Cerebral Cortex, Female, Humans, Learning, Male, Middle Aged, Models, Theoretical, Neuronal Plasticity, Neurons, Reproducibility of Results, Magnetoencephalography, Cohort Studies, Young Adult

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