ReviewCurrent opinion in neurobiology2026
Learning how to experience the world: From circuits to cell types to genes.
Review in Current opinion in neurobiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
Perception depends on the brain's ability to transform high-dimensional sensory inputs into low-dimensional internal models that support adaptive behavior. Evidence supports two frameworks for sensory perception-representational processing, in which stimulus features are progressively integrated into complex perceptual objects across a cortical hierarchy, and predictive processing, in which internally generated predictions are continuously reconciled with incoming sensory signals. Yet how these frameworks are mechanistically implemented in neural circuits, and whether they can be unified, remains an open question. Here, we review recent studies in mouse primary sensory and higher-order association cortex demonstrating that cell-type-specific transcriptional programs may provide a critical mechanistic link between these frameworks and circuit functions. In primary sensory cortices, neurons that function as stable feature detectors or respond to sensory prediction errors correspond to distinct molecularly defined cell types. In higher-order association cortices, distinct inhibitory cell-type compositions and plasticity-related gene expression support both associative learning for representational processing and error learning for predictive processing. We discuss how cell-type-specific transcriptional programs may endow cell types and circuits with the capacity to support both representational and predictive processing modes in a behavioral state-dependent manner. This could potentially enable active sensation during behavioral engagement as well as memory consolidation and model updating during behavioral quiescence. Together, these studies suggest that examining how gene expression programs equip specific cell types with relevant computational properties is a promising approach that can integrate these frameworks and provide a new understanding of how sensory perception is implemented in the brain.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.