1. Neuroscience
Download icon

Using the past to estimate sensory uncertainty

  1. Ulrik Beierholm  Is a corresponding author
  2. Tim Rohe
  3. Ambra Ferrari
  4. Oliver Stegle
  5. Uta Noppeney
  1. Durham University, United Kingdom
  2. Friedrich Alexander University Erlangen-Nuernberg, Germany
  3. University of Birmingham, United Kingdom
  4. DKFZ, Germany
Research Article
  • Cited 2
  • Views 1,340
  • Annotations
Cite this article as: eLife 2020;9:e54172 doi: 10.7554/eLife.54172


To form a more reliable percept of the environment, the brain needs to estimate its own sensory uncertainty. Current theories of perceptual inference assume that the brain computes sensory uncertainty instantaneously and independently for each stimulus. We evaluated this assumption in four psychophysical experiments, in which human observers localized auditory signals that were presented synchronously with spatially disparate visual signals. Critically, the visual noise changed dynamically over time continuously or with intermittent jumps. Our results show that observers integrate audiovisual inputs weighted by sensory uncertainty estimates that combine information from past and current signals consistent with an optimal Bayesian learner that can be approximated by exponential discounting. Our results challenge leading models of perceptual inference where sensory uncertainty estimates depend only on the current stimulus. They demonstrate that the brain capitalizes on the temporal dynamics of the external world and estimates sensory uncertainty by combining past experiences with new incoming sensory signals.

Data availability

The human behavioral raw data and computational model predictions as well as the code for computational modelling and analyses scripts are available in an OSF repository: https://osf.io/gt4jb/

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Ulrik Beierholm

    Psychology Department, Durham University, Durham, United Kingdom
    For correspondence
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-7296-7996
  2. Tim Rohe

    Institute of Psychology, Friedrich Alexander University Erlangen-Nuernberg, Erlangen, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-9713-3712
  3. Ambra Ferrari

    Centre for Computational Neuroscience and Cognitive Robotics, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-1946-3884
  4. Oliver Stegle

    DKFZ, Heidelberg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Uta Noppeney

    Computational Neuroscience and Cognitive Robotics Centre, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.


H2020 European Research Council (ERC-multsens,309349)

  • Uta Noppeney

Max Planck Society

  • Tim Rohe
  • Uta Noppeney

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG RO 5587/1-1)

  • Tim Rohe

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.


Human subjects: All volunteers participated in the study after giving written informed consent. The study was approved by the human research review committee of the University of Tuebingen (approval number 432 2007 BO1) and the research review committee of the University of Birmingham (approval number ERN_15-1458AP1).

Reviewing Editor

  1. Tobias Reichenbach, Imperial College London, United Kingdom

Publication history

  1. Received: December 4, 2019
  2. Accepted: December 13, 2020
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: December 15, 2020 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: January 13, 2021 (version 2)


© 2020, Beierholm et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.


  • 1,340
    Page views
  • 216
  • 2

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Crossref, PubMed Central, Scopus.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Download citations (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Sahana Sitaraman et al.
    Research Article

    Gap junctions between neurons serve as electrical synapses, in addition to conducting metabolites and signaling molecules. During development, early-appearing gap junctions are thought to prefigure chemical synapses, which appear much later. We present evidence for this idea at a central, glutamatergic synapse and provide some mechanistic insights. Loss or reduction in the levels of the gap junction protein Gjd2b decreased the frequency of glutamatergic miniature excitatory postsynaptic currents (mEPSCs) in cerebellar Purkinje neurons (PNs) in larval zebrafish. Ultrastructural analysis in the molecular layer showed decreased synapse density. Further, mEPSCs had faster kinetics and larger amplitudes in mutant PNs, consistent with their stunted dendritic arbors. Time-lapse microscopy in wild type and mutant PNs reveals that Gjd2b puncta promote the elongation of branches and that CaMKII may be a critical mediator of this process. These results demonstrate that Gjd2b-mediated gap junctions regulate glutamatergic synapse formation and dendritic elaboration in PNs.

    1. Neuroscience
    Amicia D Elliott et al.
    Research Article Updated

    Identifying neural substrates of behavior requires defining actions in terms that map onto brain activity. Brain and muscle activity naturally correlate via the output of motor neurons, but apart from simple movements it has been difficult to define behavior in terms of muscle contractions. By mapping the musculature of the pupal fruit fly and comprehensively imaging muscle activation at single-cell resolution, we here describe a multiphasic behavioral sequence in Drosophila. Our characterization identifies a previously undescribed behavioral phase and permits extraction of major movements by a convolutional neural network. We deconstruct movements into a syllabary of co-active muscles and identify specific syllables that are sensitive to neuromodulatory manipulations. We find that muscle activity shows considerable variability, with sequential increases in stereotypy dependent upon neuromodulation. Our work provides a platform for studying whole-animal behavior, quantifying its variability across multiple spatiotemporal scales, and analyzing its neuromodulatory regulation at cellular resolution.