Experimentally disambiguating models of sensory cue integration

Sensory cue integration is one of the primary areas in which a normative mathematical framework has been used to define the "optimal" way in which to make decisions based upon ambiguous sensory information and compare these predictions to behaviour. The conclusion from such studies is that sensory cues are integrated in a statistically optimal fashion. However, numerous alternative computational frameworks exist by which sensory cues could be integrated, many of which could be described as "optimal" based on different criteria. Existing studies rarely assess the evidence relative to different candidate models, resulting in an inability to conclude that sensory cues are integrated according to the experimenters preferred framework. The aims of the present paper are to summarise and highlight the implicit assumptions rarely acknowledged in testing models of sensory cue integration, as well as to introduce an unbiased and principled method by which to determine, for a given experimental design, the probability with which a population of observers behaving in accordance with one model of sensory integration can be distinguished from the predictions of a set of alternative models.