Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • News & Views
  • Published:

Explaining the especially pink elephant

Nature Neuroscience volume 18, pages 1435–1436 (2015)Cite this article

Subjects

A new study shows that an efficient allocation of sensory resources can lead to Bayesian estimates that are biased away from the prior, accounting for effects such as the bias toward oblique angles in orientation perception.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Efficient neural coding and Bayesian inference.

References

  1. Wei, X. & Stocker, A.A. Nat. Neurosci. 18, 1509–1517 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Attneave, F. Psychol. Rev. 61, 183–193 (1954).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Barlow, H.B. in Sensory Communication (ed. Rosenblith, W.A.) 217–234 (MIT Press, 1961).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Brunel, N. & Nadal, J.P. Neural Comput. 10, 1731–1757 (1998).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Ganguli, D. & Simoncelli, E.P. Neural Comput. 26, 2103–2134 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Knill, D. & Richards, W. Perception as Bayesian Inference (Cambridge University Press, 1996).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  7. Geisler, W.S., Perry, J., Super, B. & Gallogly, D. Vision Res. 41, 711–724 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Ernst, M.O. & Banks, M.S. Nature 415, 429–433 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Weiss, Y., Simoncelli, E.P. & Adelson, E. Nat. Neurosci. 5, 598–604 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Körding, K.P. & Wolpert, D. Nature 427, 244–247 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. de Gardelle, V., Kouider, S. & Sackur, J. J. Vis. 10, (2010).

  12. Georgeson, M.A. & Ruddock, K.H. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B [and discussion] 290, 11–22 (1980).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Stocker, A.A. & Simoncelli, E.P. Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst. 18, 1289 (2006).

    Google Scholar 

  14. Bethge, M., Rotermund, D. & Pawelzik, K. Neural Comput. 14, 2317–2351 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Berens, P., Ecker, A., Gerwinn, S., Tolias, A. & Bethge, M. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 108, 4423 (2001).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology and Center for Statistics and Machine Learning at Princeton University, Jonathan W. Pillow is at the Princeton Neuroscience Institute, Princeton, New Jersey, USA.,

    Jonathan W Pillow

Authors
  1. Jonathan W Pillow
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jonathan W Pillow.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The author declares no competing financial interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pillow, J. Explaining the especially pink elephant. Nat Neurosci 18, 1435–1436 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.4122

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.4122

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing