The dynamic relationship between pupil dilation and neural surprise in natural language comprehension
Quirin GehmacheriD, Aaron KaltenmaieriD, Juliane SchubertiD, Nathan WeisziD, Clare PressiD
Abstract
Predictive processing accounts hold that the brain continuously generates predictions and updates internal models from error signals, but it remains unclear whether prediction representation and model-updating reflect a single graded computation or computationally distinct operations implemented in dissociable systems. We recorded magnetoencephalography (MEG) and pupillometry while participants listened to continuous natural speech, quantifying word-by-word lexical surprise and semantic prediction error with a GPT-2 model. Broadly speaking, lexical surprise was tracked in a predominantly graded fashion, whereas the response to semantic error was better captured by a rectified linear (ReLU) gating function - i.e., that responds only when the error exceeds a recent contextual baseline. There were also some interesting dissociations in the strength of these relative effects. The auditory cortex tracked lexical surprise in a graded, continuous manner, with later cortical stages reflecting semantic error. By contrast, tonic pupil diameter and source-localised brainstem responses were predominantly captured by a gated response to semantic error. A pupil-coupling analysis confirmed that this gating signature was statistically shared between pupil-linked arousal and brainstem-localised, but not cortical, responses. Together, these findings reveal a division of labour in which the cortex maintains a continuous, high-fidelity map of predictive information while a pupil-linked model-update system acts as a selective gate, engaged specifically by meaning-disrupting events that have crossed a threshold level of error. This asymmetry suggests that signals serving continuous parsing of prediction error and signals serving model revision may be computationally dissociated, with a range of implications for our understanding of the intrinsic interactions between mechanisms serving perception and learning.
02 /Specification & Classification
Click any tag to browse matching papers- Citations
- 0
- Organism
- Assay
- Research Focus
- Approach
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- Convergent neural signatures of speech prediction error are a biological marker for spoken word recognition
Ediz Sohoglu, Loes Beckers, Matthew H. Davis·Nature CommunicationsPeer-reviewed·Nov 18, 2024
- Bayesian semantic surprise based on different types of regularities predicts the N400 and P600 brain signals
Alice Hodapp, Alma Lindborg, Milena Rabovsky·bioRxiv·Mar 13, 2024
- Lexical surprisal drives pupil dilation during continuous story listening
Chiara Terzo, Eva Berlot, Floris P. de Lange·bioRxiv·Oct 30, 2026
- Attention or prediction? Characterizing the top-down influence of predictive context on speech encoding
Alyssa Horng, Wei-Ching Lin, … Edmund C. Lalor·bioRxiv·Aug 20, 2026
- Sensory sharpening and semantic prediction errors unify competing models of predictive processing in human speech comprehension
Fabian Schneider, Helen Blank·PLoS BiologyPeer-reviewed·Jan 9, 2026
- A hierarchy of linguistic predictions during natural language comprehension
Micha Heilbron, Kristijan Armeni, … Floris P. de Lange·Proceedings of the National Academy of SciencesPeer-reviewed·Aug 3, 2022