Research ExplorerPublicationsThe standard Bayesian model is normatively invalid for biolo...

The standard Bayesian model is normatively invalid for biological brains

Standard

The standard Bayesian model is normatively invalid for biological brains. / Moran, Rani; Tsetsos, Konstantinos.

In: BEHAV BRAIN SCI, Vol. 41, 01.2018, p. e237.

Research output: SCORING: Contribution to journal › Other (editorial matter etc.) › Research

Harvard

Moran, R & Tsetsos, K 2018, 'The standard Bayesian model is normatively invalid for biological brains', BEHAV BRAIN SCI, vol. 41, pp. e237. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X18001449

APA

Moran, R., & Tsetsos, K. (2018). The standard Bayesian model is normatively invalid for biological brains. BEHAV BRAIN SCI, 41, e237. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X18001449

Vancouver

Moran R, Tsetsos K. The standard Bayesian model is normatively invalid for biological brains. BEHAV BRAIN SCI. 2018 Jan;41:e237. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X18001449

Bibtex

@article{8a48b367a1b340db9a2ba1503e5416a6,
title = "The standard Bayesian model is normatively invalid for biological brains",
abstract = "We show that the benchmark Bayesian framework that Rahnev & Denison (R&D) used to assess optimality is actually suboptimal under realistic assumptions about how noise corrupts decision making in biological brains. This model is therefore invalid qua normative standard. We advise against generally forsaking optimality and argue that a biologically constrained definition of optimality could serve as an important driver for scientific progress.",
keywords = "Journal Article",
author = "Rani Moran and Konstantinos Tsetsos",
note = "Editorial Material",
year = "2018",
month = jan,
doi = "10.1017/S0140525X18001449",
language = "English",
volume = "41",
pages = "e237",
journal = "BEHAV BRAIN SCI",
issn = "0140-525X",
publisher = "Cambridge University Press",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - The standard Bayesian model is normatively invalid for biological brains

AU - Moran, Rani

AU - Tsetsos, Konstantinos

N1 - Editorial Material

PY - 2018/1

Y1 - 2018/1

N2 - We show that the benchmark Bayesian framework that Rahnev & Denison (R&D) used to assess optimality is actually suboptimal under realistic assumptions about how noise corrupts decision making in biological brains. This model is therefore invalid qua normative standard. We advise against generally forsaking optimality and argue that a biologically constrained definition of optimality could serve as an important driver for scientific progress.

AB - We show that the benchmark Bayesian framework that Rahnev & Denison (R&D) used to assess optimality is actually suboptimal under realistic assumptions about how noise corrupts decision making in biological brains. This model is therefore invalid qua normative standard. We advise against generally forsaking optimality and argue that a biologically constrained definition of optimality could serve as an important driver for scientific progress.

KW - Journal Article

U2 - 10.1017/S0140525X18001449

DO - 10.1017/S0140525X18001449

M3 - Other (editorial matter etc.)

C2 - 30767797

VL - 41

SP - e237

JO - BEHAV BRAIN SCI

JF - BEHAV BRAIN SCI

SN - 0140-525X

ER -