My name is Liqiang Huang, and I work in the Department of Psychology at The Chinese University of Hong Kong. You can reach me at lqhuang@cuhk.edu.hk.
My research is ultimately based on the concept of the PBS (Precision–Breadth–Simplicity) impossible trinity. So, what exactly does the PBS impossible trinity mean? Specifically, it entails that precise and simple experimental findings are inevitably fragmented, while broad and simple theoretical notions are inevitably ambiguous.
Already familiar with this? Sure—but the key point is that these reflect a fundamental limit. This is not a problem that can be solved through self-disciplined hard work, nor one that will improve over time. Instead, it calls for a method fundamentally different from the traditional theory-driven approach—what we call the Comprehensive Exploration (CE) approach.
In the CE approach, we use experimental benchmarks on a massive scale—for example, a single experiment involving 30,000 hours of data—to cover a broad range of phenomena. We then build models that are as precise as possible while remaining only moderately complex. This provides the practical best solution to the PBS impossible trinity.
Below on this page, you will find the four steps of the CE approach. Details of this approach are described in this paper and further explained on this YouTube channel. A list of published and ongoing projects using CE is available here.
I came up with this approach through a long and painful 12-year struggle. If you're interested in the story, you can take a look at this blog or watch a video.
The first step is design: stimulus-driven design. In experimental psychology, researchers typically formulate specific hypotheses and then test them. Although valuable, this strategy can constrain discovery to possibilities anticipated in advance. Stimulus-driven design allows researchers to move beyond this constraint. In ImageNet, variations across millions of images encode rich information about object categories; even when researchers do not know the relevant regularities beforehand, modeling can reveal them. Similarly, in a recent CE study of visual working memory (Huang, 2025), the underlying mechanisms were not specified in advance. Instead, modeling performance across randomly generated color patterns recovered all the classic mechanisms examined, as well as several novel ones.
The second step is data: large-scale experimentation. As in AI, this stage establishes a robust empirical foundation. For instance, Huang (2025) collected 40 million responses across 10,000 color patterns. This scale provides the basis for a comprehensive exploration of the phenomena of interest.
The third step is analysis: iterative model development, the most labor-intensive stage of the CE approach. The general strategy is to draw on both theoretical insights from the literature and patterns observed in the data to explore candidate model components and alternative ways of assembling them into a complete model.
The fourth step is outcome: an interpretable computational model. A defining characteristic of this outcome is the deliberate balance between predictive accuracy and interpretive parsimony. Because the model is formal and computational, it offers greater precision than accounts based primarily on verbal interpretations. At the same time, it is kept relatively simple: unlike “black-box” neural networks, CE models are explicitly designed to map computations onto psychologically meaningful mechanisms. This balance helps bridge the gap between explanation and prediction. Neural networks often achieve high predictive accuracy at the expense of interpretability, whereas traditional psychological theories are often interpretable but lack comprehensive predictive power. CE models seek to combine these strengths. For example, the model in Huang (2025), containing only 57 parameters, outperforms a complex neural network with 30,796 parameters. The CE approach thus aims to deliver a relatively simple, interpretable theory with broad explanatory and predictive power.