Probabilistic representations should be defined by their computational role: reply to Rahnev et al. 2021

preprint OA: closed CC-BY-4.0
🔓 Open OA copy View at publisher

Abstract

Note: This is a reply to the Generative Adversarial Collaboration "Is perception probabilistic? Clarifying the definitions" by Rahnev, Block, Denison, and Jehee (DOI 10.31234/osf.io/f8v5r). Probabilistic representations promise to shed light on how humans and other organisms cope with uncertainty, but debates about them have been hindered by unclear definitions and a lack of testable predictions. We argue that neither camp in this GAC has offered a plausible way out of this situation. We describe problems with their attempts to define probabilistic representations and sketch an alternative view, in which the defining feature of a probabilistic representation is how it is used.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. The paper's references may be in our DB but unresolved to ``paper_id`` (resolution happens at ingest when the cited DOI matches a row we already have). Run the cross-source citation reconcile pass to retry.

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-05-19T01:45:01.086888+00:00
unpaywall
last seen: 2026-05-23T02:00:01.238055+00:00
License: CC-BY-4.0