Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 27, 2025

P300-Based Brain-Computer Interface Speller Performance Estimation with Classifier-Based Latency Estimation
Published on: September 8, 2023
Predictions and errors are distinctly represented across V1 layers
Emily R Thomas1, Joost Haarsma2, Jessica Nicholson3
1Neuroscience Institute, New York University Medical Center, 435 East 30(th) Street, New York 10016, USA; Department of Psychological Sciences, Birkbeck, University of London, Malet Street, London WC1E 7HX, UK.
Abstract:
Popular accounts of mind and brain propose that the brain continuously forms predictions about future sensory inputs and combines predictions with inputs to determine what we perceive.1,2,3,4,5,6 Under "predictive processing" schemes, such integration is supported by the hierarchical organization of the cortex, whereby feedback connections communicate predictions from higher-level deep layers to agranular (superficial and deep) lower-level layers.7,8,9,10 Predictions are compared with input to compute the "prediction error," which is transmitted up the hierarchy from superficial layers of lower cortical regions to the middle layers of higher areas, to update higher-level predictions until errors are reconciled.11,12,13,14,15 In the primary visual cortex (V1), predictions have thereby been proposed to influence representations in deep layers while error signals may be computed in superficial layers. Despite the framework's popularity, there is little evidence for these functional distinctions because, to our knowledge, unexpected sensory events have not previously been presented in human laminar paradigms to contrast against expected events. To this end, this 7T fMRI study contrasted V1 responses to expected (75% likely) and unexpected (25%) Gabor orientations. Multivariate decoding analyses revealed an interaction between expectation and layer, such that expected events could be decoded with comparable accuracy across layers, while unexpected events could only be decoded in superficial laminae. Although these results are in line with these accounts that have been popular for decades, such distinctions have not previously been demonstrated in humans. We discuss how both prediction and error processes may operate together to shape our unitary perceptual experiences.
Related Concept Videos
Prediction Intervals
However, the point estimate is most likely not the exact value of the population parameter, but close to it. After calculating point estimates, we construct interval estimates, called confidence intervals or prediction intervals. This prediction interval comprises a range of values unlike the point estimate and is a better predictor of the observed sample value, y.
Accuracy and Precision
End Point Prediction: Gran Plot
For potentiometric titration, the Gran plot is created by plotting...
Accuracy, limits, and approximation
Accuracy is defined as the closeness of the measured value to the true or actual value. In engineering mechanics, repeated measurements are taken during theoretical or experimental analyses to ensure that the result is precise and accurate.
The accuracy of any solution is based on the...
Difference from Background: Limit of Detection
The LOD indicates the presence or absence...
Accuracy and Errors in Hypothesis Testing
In hypothesis testing, the probability of making a Type I error, denoted as α, is commonly set at 0.05. This significance level indicates a 5%...

