The Bayesian Causal Inference in Multisensory Information Processing: A Narrative Review

  • Yang Xi
  • Ning Gao
  • Mengchao Zhang
  • Lin Liu
  • Qi Li
Conference paper
Part of the Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies book series (SIST, volume 109)


When processing the simultaneous multisensory information, the brain must first infer whether the information comes from the same object, which is a prerequisite for multisensory information processing. The Bayesian causal inference can effectively simulate the inference process in the brain and predict the results. This paper reviews the research of multisensory information processing based on Bayesian causal inference, introduces the Bayesian causal inference theory in multisensory information processing, explains the multisensory information processing based on this theory in detail, analyzed the factors influencing the causal inference and the future research direction, in order to enhance the new understanding of the brain-like model for multisensory information processing, and to provide reference for the research of multisensory information processing in future.


Multisensory integration Causal inference Bayesian causal inference 


  1. 1.
    Kayser, C., Shams, L.: Multisensory causal inference in the brain. PLoS Biol. 13(2), e1002075 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Tong, J., Parisi, G.I., Wermter, S.: Closing the loop on multisensory interactions: a neuralarchitecture for multisensory causal inference and recalibration (2018)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Körding, K.P., Beierholm, U., Ma, W.J., et al.: Causal inference in multisensory perception. PLoS One 2(9), e943 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Shams, L., Beierholm, U.R.: Causal inference in perception. Trends Cogn. Sci. 14(9), 425–432 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Spence, C., Squire, S.: Multisensory integration: maintaining the perception of synchrony. Curr. Biol. 13(13), 519–521 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ernst, M.O., Bülthoff, A.H.H.: Merging the senses into a robust percept. Trends Cogn. Sci. 8(4), 162–169 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    De, G.B., Bertelson, P.: Multisensory integration, perception and ecological validity. Trends Cogn. Sci. 7(10), 460–467 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Winkel, K.N.D., Katliar, M., Bülthoff, H.H.: Forced fusion in multisensory heading estimation. PLoS One 10(5), e0127104 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bresciani, J.P., Dammeier, F., Ernst, M.O.: Vision and touch are automatically integrated for the perception of sequences of events. J. Vis. 6(5), 554–564 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Stevenson, I., Koerding, K.: Structural inference affects depth perception in the context of potential occlusion. Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst. 1777–1784 (2009)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Shams, L., Ma, W.J., Beierholm, U.: Sound-induced flash illusion as an optimal percept. NeuroReport 16(17), 1923–1927 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Samad, M., Chung, A.J., Shams, L.: Perception of body ownership is driven by Bayesian sensory inference. PLoS One 10(2), e0117178 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mendonça, C., Mandelli, P., Pulkki, V.: Modeling the perception of audiovisual distance: Bayesian causal inference and other models. PLoS One 11(12) (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ursino, M., Cuppini, C., Magosso, E.: Neurocomputational approaches to modelling multisensory integration in the brain: a review. Neural Netw. 60, 141–165 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Battaglia, P.W., Jacobs, R.A., Aslin, R.N.: Bayesian integration of visual and auditory signals for spatial localization. J. Opt. Soc. Am. Opt. Image Sci. Vis. 20(7), 1391–1397 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rowland, B., Stanford, T., Stein, B.: A bayesian model unifies multisensory spatial localization with the physiological properties of the superior colliculus. Exp. Brain Res. 180(1), 153–161 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ernst, M.O.: A bayesian view on multimodal cue integration. Behav. Brain Sci. (2006)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Samad, M., Chung, A.J., Shams, L.: Perception of body ownership is driven by bayesian sensory inference. PLoS One 10(2), e0117178 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Brian, O., Wozny, D.R., Ladan, S.: Biases in visual, auditory, and audiovisual perception of space. PLoS Comput. Biol. 11(12), e1004649 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rohe, T., Noppeney, U.: Cortical hierarchies perform Bayesian causal inference in multisensory perception. PLoS Biol. 13(2), e1002073 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Rohe, T., Noppeney, U.: Sensory reliability shapes perceptual inference via two mechanisms. J. Vis. 15(5), 22 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mahani, M.N., Sheybani, S., Bausenhart, K.M.: multisensory perception of contradictory information in an environment of varying reliability: evidence for conscious perception and optimal causal inference. Sci. Rep. 7(1), 3167 (2017)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Roach, N.W., James, H., Mcgraw, P.V.: Resolving multisensory conflict: a strategy for balancing the costs and benefits of audio-visual integration. Proc. Biol. Sci. 273(1598), 2159–2168 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Wozny, D.R., Beierholm, U.R., Shams, L.: Probability matching as a computational strategy used in perception. PLoS Comput. Biol. 6(8), 861–864 (2010)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Drugowitsch, J., Deangelis, G.C., Angelaki, D.E.: Tuning the speed-accuracy trade-off to maximize reward rate in multisensory decision-making. Elife Sci. 4(2015)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ernst, M.O., Banks, M.S.: Humans integrate visual and haptic information in a statistically optimal fashion. Nature 415(6870), 429–433 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Girshick, A.R., Banks, M.S.: Probabilistic combination of slant information: weighted averaging and robustness as optimal percepts. J. Vis. 9(9), 1–20 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Gepshtein, S., Burge, J., Ernst, M.O.: The combination of vision and touch depends on spatial proximity. J. Vis. 5(11), 1013 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Alais, D., Burr, D.: The ventriloquist effect results from near-optimal bimodal integration. Curr. Biol. Cb 14(3), 257–262 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Magnotti, J.F., Beauchamp, M.S: A causal inference model explains perception of the McGurk effect and other incongruent audiovisual speech. Plos Comput. Biol. 13(2), e1005229 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Daemi, M., Harris, L.R., Crawford, J.D.: Causal inference for cross-modal action selection: a computational study in a decision making framework. Front. Comput. Neurosci. 10(11) (2016)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Locke, S.M., Landy, M.S.: Temporal causal inference with stochastic audiovisual sequences. PLoS One 12(9), e0183776 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Gurler, D., Doyle, N., Walker, E.: A link between individual differences in multisensory speech perception and eye movements. Atten. Percept. Psychophys. 77(4), 1333–1341 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Seilheimer, R.L., Rosenberg, A., Angelaki, D.E.: Models and processes of multisensory cue combination. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 25(2), 38 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Odegaard, B., Wozny, D.R., Shams, L.: A simple and efficient method to enhance audiovisual binding tendencies. Peerj 5(5), e3143 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Horst, A.C.T, Koppen, M., Selen, L.P.J.: Reliability-based weighting of visual and vestibular cues in displacement estimation. Plos One 10(12), e0145015 (2015)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Beauchamp, M.S., Pasalar, S.: Neural substrates of reliability-weighted visual-tactile multisensory integration. Front. Syst. Neurosci. 4, 25 (2010)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Helbig, H.B., Ernst, M.O., Ricciardi, E.: The neural mechanisms of reliability weighted integration of shape information from vision and touch. Neuroimage 60(2), 1063–1072 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Morgan, M.L., Deangelis, G.C., Angelaki, D.E.: Multisensory integration in macaque visual cortex depends on cue reliability. Neuron 59(4), 662–673 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Hillock-Dunn, A., Grantham, D.W., Wallace, M.T.: The temporal binding window for audiovisual speech: children are like little adults. Neuropsychologia 88, 74–82 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Helbig, H.B., Ernst, M.O.: Knowledge about a common source can promote visual-haptic integration. Perception 36(10), 1523–1533 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Beierholm, U.R., Quartz, S.R., Shams, L.: Bayesian priors are encoded independently from likelihoods in human multisensory perception. J. Vis. 9(5), 23.1 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Cuppini, C., Shams, L., Magosso, E., Mauro, U.: A biologically inspired neurocomputational model for audio-visual integration and causal inference. Eur. J. Neurosci. 46(9), 2481–2498 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Mcgovern, D.P., Roudaia, E., Newell, F.N.: Perceptual learning shapes multisensory causal inference via two distinct mechanisms. Sci. Rep. 6, 24673 (2016)Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    曾毅, 刘成林, 谭铁牛: 类脑智能研究的回顾与展望. 计算机学报 39 (1), 212–222 (2016)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yang Xi
    • 1
    • 2
  • Ning Gao
    • 1
  • Mengchao Zhang
    • 3
  • Lin Liu
    • 3
  • Qi Li
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Computer Science and TechnologyChangchun University of Science and TechnologyChangchunPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.College of Information EngineeringNortheast Electric Power UniversityJilinPeople’s Republic of China
  3. 3.Department of RadiologyChina-Japan Union Hospital of Jilin UniversityChangchunPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations