Abstract

Accumulating evidence indicates that the human brain copes with sensory uncertainty in accordance with Bayes' rule. However, it is unknown how humans make predictions when the generative model of the task at hand is described by uncertain parameters. Here, we tested whether and how humans take parameter uncertainty into account in a regression task. Participants extrapolated a parabola from a limited number of noisy points, shown on a computer screen. The quadratic parameter was drawn from a bimodal prior distribution. We tested whether human observers take full advantage of the given information, including the likelihood of the quadratic parameter value given the observed points and the quadratic parameter's prior distribution. We compared human performance with Bayesian regression, which is the (Bayes) optimal solution to this problem, and three sub-optimal models, which are simpler to compute. Our results show that, under our specific experimental conditions, humans behave in a way that is consistent with Bayesian regression. Moreover, our results support the hypothesis that humans generate responses in a manner consistent with probability matching rather than Bayesian decision theory.

Highlights

  • The brain evolved in an environment that requires fast decisions to be made based on noisy, ambiguous and sparse sensory information, using noisy information processing and noisy effectors

  • The rationale is that the higher the noise level, the higher the uncertainty about the correct parameter and, according to Bayesian regression, the more participants should rely on the prior and produce a bimodal response distribution

  • We found that Bayesian regression explains participants’ responses better than maximum likelihood regression and maximum a posteriori regression

Read more

Summary

Author summary

We show that in this task, humans perform in a manner consistent with the mathematically optimal model, i.e., Bayesian regression

Introduction
Results
Discussion
Methods and materials
Participants
Ethics statement
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call