Of course there are many different theories, but that's my favourite.
It's very interesting in the sense that the totality of brains over time is essentially a sort of supervised learning with huge amounts of input data.
The brain contains/is the model. It is trained by a range of inputs and by definition it generalizes outside those inputs.
If you're asking how does the brain minimize out-of-sample error? It does that by the virtue that it's model isn't too complex for the training set, just like what you do in machine learning. If the brain had a model that was too complex it would overfit and poorly generalize just like machine learning would do with a too complex of a model...
Some people would have trouble handling something that had \lim_{a \to x} (some complicated f(a,x,y)) where y is a constant even though they could handle it with standard notation.
For another possible example, take something you've written recently, replace all the variable names with things like Integer, Double, and the function names with For, While (within the syntax of the language) and then try reading it.
Besides this, there's the jesus-in-toast, man-in-the-moon, face-on-mars business. The brain overfits everything, but it never stops training. It's in constant reinforcement learning.