Computational Neuroscience seminars

We see the last cookie in the box and think, can I take that? We reach a hand out. In the 2.1 seconds that this impulse travels through our brain, billions of neurons communicate with one another, sending blips of voltage through our sensory and motor regions. Neuroscientists call these blips “spikes.” Spikes enable us to do everything: talk, eat, run, see, plan, and decide. In The Spike, Mark Humphries takes readers on the epic journey of a spike through a single, brief reaction. In vivid language, Humphries tells the story of what happens in our brain, what we know about spikes, and what we still have left to understand about them. Drawing on decades of research in neuroscience, Humphries explores how spikes are born, how they are transmitted, and how they lead us to action. He dives into previously unanswered mysteries: Why are most neurons silent? What causes neurons to fire spikes spontaneously, without input from other neurons or the outside world? Why do most spikes fail to reach any destination? Humphries presents a new vision of the brain, one where fundamental computations are carried out by spontaneous spikes that predict what will happen in the world, helping us to perceive, decide, and react quickly enough for our survival. Traversing neuroscience’s expansive terrain, The Spike follows a single electrical response to illuminate how our extraordinary brains work.

To understand how the brain can perform complex tasks such as perception, we have to understand how information enters the brain, how it is transformed and how it is transferred. But, how do we measure information transfer in the brain? This presentation will start with a general introduction of what mutual information is and how to measure it in an experimental setup. Next, the talk will focus on how this can be used to develop brain models at different (spatial) levels, from the microscopic single neuron level to the macroscopic network and behavioural level. How can we incorporate the knowledge about single neurons, that already show complex dynamics, into network activity and link this to behaviour?

In the past several years, I have been involved in building a biologically realistic model of the monkey visual cortex. Work on one of the input layers (4Ca) of the primary visual cortex (V1) is now nearly complete, and I would like to share some of what I have learned with the community. After a brief overview of the model and its capabilities, I would like to focus on three sets of results that represent three different aspects of the modeling. They are: (i) emergent E-I dynamics in local circuits; (ii) how visual cortical neurons acquire their ability to detect edges and directions of motion, and (iii) a view across the cortical surface: nonequilibrium steady states (in analogy with statistical mechanics) and beyond.

During primate evolution, prefrontal cortex (PFC) expanded substantially relative to other cortical areas. The expansion of PFC circuits likely supported the increased cognitive abilities of humans and anthropoids to plan, evaluate, and decide between different courses of action. But what do these circuits compute as a decision is being made, and how can they be related to anatomical specialisations within and across PFC? To address this, we recorded PFC activity during value-based decision making using single unit recording in non-human primates and magnetoencephalography in humans. At a macrocircuit level, we found that value correlates differ substantially across PFC subregions. They are heavily shaped by each subregion’s anatomical connections and by the decision-maker’s current locus of attention. At a microcircuit level, we found that the temporal evolution of value correlates can be predicted using cortical recurrent network models that temporally integrate incoming decision evidence. These models reflect the fact that PFC circuits are highly recurrent in nature and have synaptic properties that support persistent activity across temporally extended cognitive tasks. Our findings build upon recent work describing economic decision making as a process of attention-weighted evidence integration across time.

The regions of the insect brain devoted to spatial navigation are beautifully orderly, with a remarkably precise pattern of synaptic connections. Thus, we can learn much about the neural mechanisms of spatial navigation by targeting identifiable neurons in these networks for in vivo patch clamp recording and calcium imaging. Our lab has recently discovered that the "compass system" in the Drosophila brain is anchored to not only visual landmarks, but also the prevailing wind direction. Moreover, we found that the compass system can re-learn the relationship between these external sensory cues and internal self-motion cues, via rapid associative synaptic plasticity. Postsynaptic to compass neurons, we found neurons that conjunctively encode heading direction and body-centric translational velocity. We then showed how this representation of travel velocity is transformed from body- to world-centric coordinates at the subsequent layer of the network, two synapses downstream from compass neurons. By integrating this world-centric vector-velocity representation over time, it should be possible for the brain to form a stored representation of the body's path through the environment.

Neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer’s or Parkinson’s are devastating conditions with poorly understood mechanisms and no cure. Yet, a striking feature of these conditions is the characteristic pattern of invasion throughout the brain, leading to well-codified disease stages associated with various cognitive deficits and pathologies. How can we use mathematical modelling to gain insight into this process and, doing so, gain understanding about how the brain works? In this talk, I will show that by linking new mathematical theories to recent progress in imaging, we can unravel some of the universal features associated with dementia and, more generally, brain functions.

The Stabilized Supralinear Network is a model of recurrently connected excitatory (E) and inhibitory (I) neurons with a supralinear input-output relation. It can explain cortical computations such as response normalization and inhibitory stabilization. However, the network's connectivity is designed by hand, based on experimental measurements. How the recurrent synaptic weights can be learned from the sensory input statistics in a biologically plausible way is unknown. Earlier theoretical work on plasticity focused on single neurons and the balance of excitation and inhibition but did not consider the simultaneous plasticity of recurrent synapses and the formation of receptive fields. Here we present a recurrent E-I network model where all synaptic connections are simultaneously plastic, and E neurons self-stabilize by recruiting co-tuned inhibition. Motivated by experimental results, we employ a local Hebbian plasticity rule with multiplicative normalization for E and I synapses. We develop a theoretical framework that explains how plasticity enables inhibition balanced excitatory receptive fields that match experimental results. We show analytically that sufficiently strong inhibition allows neurons' receptive fields to decorrelate and distribute themselves across the stimulus space. For strong recurrent excitation, the network becomes stabilized by inhibition, which prevents unconstrained self-excitation. In this regime, external inputs integrate sublinearly. As in the Stabilized Supralinear Network, this results in response normalization and winner-takes-all dynamics: when two competing stimuli are presented, the network response is dominated by the stronger stimulus while the weaker stimulus is suppressed. In summary, we present a biologically plausible theoretical framework to model plasticity in fully plastic recurrent E-I networks. While the connectivity is derived from the sensory input statistics, the circuit performs meaningful computations. Our work provides a mathematical framework of plasticity in recurrent networks, which has previously only been studied numerically and can serve as the basis for a new generation of brain-inspired unsupervised machine learning algorithms.

Odor memories are exceptionally robust and essential for the survival of many species. In rodents, the olfactory cortex shows features of an autoassociative memory network and plays a key role in the retrieval of olfactory memories (Meissner-Bernard et al., 2019). Interestingly, the telencephalic area Dp, the zebrafish homolog of olfactory cortex, transiently enters a state of precise balance during the presentation of an odor (Rupprecht and Friedrich, 2018). This state is characterized by large synaptic conductances (relative to the resting conductance) and by co-tuning of excitation and inhibition in odor space and in time at the level of individual neurons. Our aim is to understand how this precise synaptic balance affects memory function. For this purpose, we build a simplified, yet biologically plausible spiking neural network model of Dp using experimental observations as constraints: besides precise balance, key features of Dp dynamics include low firing rates, odor-specific population activity and a dominance of recurrent inputs from Dp neurons relative to afferent inputs from neurons in the olfactory bulb. To achieve co-tuning of excitation and inhibition, we introduce structured connectivity by increasing connection probabilities and/or strength among ensembles of excitatory and inhibitory neurons. These ensembles are therefore structural memories of activity patterns representing specific odors. They form functional inhibitory-stabilized subnetworks, as identified by the “paradoxical effect” signature (Tsodyks et al., 1997): inhibition of inhibitory “memory” neurons leads to an increase of their activity. We investigate the benefits of co-tuning for olfactory and memory processing, by comparing inhibitory-stabilized networks with and without co-tuning. We find that co-tuned excitation and inhibition improves robustness to noise, pattern completion and pattern separation. In other words, retrieval of stored information from partial or degraded sensory inputs is enhanced, which is relevant in light of the instability of the olfactory environment. Furthermore, in co-tuned networks, odor-evoked activation of stored patterns does not persist after removal of the stimulus and may therefore subserve fast pattern classification. These findings provide valuable insights into the computations performed by the olfactory cortex, and into general effects of balanced state dynamics in associative memory networks.

The analysis of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data can greatly benefit from flexible analytic approaches. In particular, the advent of data-driven approaches to identify whole-brain time-varying connectivity and activity has revealed a number of interesting relevant variation in the data which, when ignored, can provide misleading information. In this lecture I will provide a comparative introduction of a range of data-driven approaches to estimating time-varying connectivity. I will also present detailed examples where studies of both brain health and disorder have been advanced by approaches designed to capture and estimate time-varying information in resting fMRI data. I will review several exemplar data sets analyzed in different ways to demonstrate the complementarity as well as trade-offs of various modeling approaches to answer questions about brain function. Finally, I will review and provide examples of strategies for validating time-varying connectivity including simulations, multimodal imaging, and comparative prediction within clinical populations, among others. As part of the interactive aspect I will provide a hands-on guide to the dynamic functional network connectivity toolbox within the GIFT software, including an online didactic analytic decision tree to introduce the various concepts and decisions that need to be made when using such tools

Neuronal variability is a reflection of recurrent circuitry and cellular physiology. The modulation of neuronal variability is a reliable signature of cognitive and processing state. A pervasive yet puzzling feature of cortical circuits is that despite their complex wiring, population-wide shared spiking variability is low dimensional with all neurons fluctuating en masse. We show that the spatiotemporal dynamics in a spatially structured network produce large population-wide shared variability. When the spatial and temporal scales of inhibitory coupling match known physiology, model spiking neurons naturally generate low dimensional shared variability that captures in vivo population recordings along the visual pathway. Further, we show that firing rate models with spatial coupling can also generate chaotic and low-dimensional rate dynamics. The chaotic parameter region expands when the network is driven by correlated noisy inputs, while being insensitive to the intensity of independent noise.

Many flexible behaviors are thought to rely on internal representations of an animal’s spatial relationship to its environment and of the consequences of its actions in that environment. While such representations—e.g. of head direction and value—have been extensively studied, how they are combined to guide behavior is not well understood. I will discuss how we are exploring these questions using a classical visual learning paradigm for the fly. I’ll begin by describing a simple policy that, when tethered to an internal representation of heading, captures structured behavioral variability in this task. I’ll describe how ambiguities in the fly’s visual surroundings affect its perception and, when coupled to this policy, manifest in predictable changes in behavior. Informed by newly-released connectomic data, I’ll then discuss how these computations might be carried out and combined within specific circuits in the fly’s central brain, and how perception and action might interact to shape individual differences in learning performance.

The human brain network architecture can reveal crucial aspects of brain function and dysfunction. The topology of this network (known as the connectome) is shaped by a trade-off between wiring cost and network efficiency, and it has highly connected hub regions playing a prominent role in many brain disorders. By studying a landscape of plausible brain networks that preserve the wiring cost, fragile and resilient hubs can be identified. In this webinar, Dr Leonardo Gollo and Dr James Pang from Monash University will discuss this approach across the lifespan and some of its implications for neurodevelopmental and neurodegenerative diseases. Dr Leonardo Gollo is a Senior Research Fellow at the Turner Institute for Brain and Mental Health, School of Psychological Sciences, Monash University. He holds an ARC Future Fellowship and his research interests include brain modelling, systems neuroscience, and connectomics. Dr James Pang is a Research Fellow at the Turner Institute for Brain and Mental Health, School of Psychological Sciences, Monash University. His research interests are on combining neuroimaging and biophysical modelling to better understand the mechanisms of brain function in health and disease.

Traditionally, the term dynamics means changes in a system evolving over time. However, in the brain action potentials propagate along axons to induce postsynaptic currents with different delays at many sites simultaneously. This fundamental computational mechanism evolves spatially to engage the neuron populations involved in brain functions. To identify and understand the spatial processing in brains, this workshop will focus on the spatial principles of brain dynamics that determine how action potentials and membrane currents propagate in the networks of neurons that brains are made of. We will focus on non-artificial dynamics, which excludes in vitro dynamics, interference, electrical and optogenetic stimulations of brains in vivo. Recent non-artificial studies of spatial brain dynamics can actually explain how sensory, motor and internal brain functions evolve. The purpose of this workshop is to discuss these recent results and identify common principles of spatial brain dynamics.

It has generally been presumed that sensory information encoded by a nervous system should be as accurate as its biological limitations allow. However, perhaps counter intuitively, accurate representations of sensory signals do not necessarily maximize the organism’s chances of survival. We show that neural codes that maximize reward expectation—and not accurate sensory representations—account for retinal responses in insects, and retinotopically-specific adaptive codes in humans. Thus, our results provide evidence that fitness-maximizing rules imposed by the environment are applied at the earliest stages of sensory processing.

Start of the talk will be 17:15h (CEST). This session is a double feature of the Cologne Theoretical Neuroscience Forum and the BCCN Berlin.

Traditionally, the term dynamics means changes in a system evolving over time. However, in the brain action potentials propagate along axons to induce postsynaptic currents with different delays at many sites simultaneously. This fundamental computational mechanism evolves spatially to engage the neuron populations involved in brain functions. To identify and understand the spatial processing in brains, this workshop will focus on the spatial principles of brain dynamics that determine how action potentials and membrane currents propagate in the networks of neurons that brains are made of. We will focus on non-artificial dynamics, which excludes in vitro dynamics, interference, electrical and optogenetic stimulations of brains in vivo. Recent non-artificial studies of spatial brain dynamics can actually explain how sensory, motor and internal brain functions evolve. The purpose of this workshop is to discuss these recent results and identify common principles of spatial brain dynamics.

Traditionally, the term dynamics means changes in a system evolving over time. However, in the brain action potentials propagate along axons to induce postsynaptic currents with different delays at many sites simultaneously. This fundamental computational mechanism evolves spatially to engage the neuron populations involved in brain functions. To identify and understand the spatial processing in brains, this workshop will focus on the spatial principles of brain dynamics that determine how action potentials and membrane currents propagate in the networks of neurons that brains are made of. We will focus on non-artificial dynamics, which excludes in vitro dynamics, interference, electrical and optogenetic stimulations of brains in vivo. Recent non-artificial studies of spatial brain dynamics can actually explain how sensory, motor and internal brain functions evolve. The purpose of this workshop is to discuss these recent results and identify common principles of spatial brain dynamics.

Behavioural measurements are often overlooked by computational neuroscientists, who prefer to focus on electrophysiological recordings or neuroimaging data. This attitude is largely due to perceived lack of depth/richness in relation to behavioural datasets. I will show how contemporary psychophysics can deliver extremely rich and highly constraining datasets that naturally interface with computational modelling. More specifically, I will demonstrate how psychophysics can be used to guide/constrain/refine computational models, and how models can be exploited to design/motivate/interpret psychophysical experiments. Examples will span a wide range of topics (from feature detection to natural scene understanding) and methodologies (from cascade models to deep learning architectures).

Though the term has many definitions, computational neuroscience is mainly about applying mathematics to the study of the brain. The brain—a jumble of all different kinds of neurons interconnected in countless ways that somehow produce consciousness—has been described as “the most complex object in the known universe”. Physicists for centuries have turned to mathematics to properly explain some of the most seemingly simple processes in the universe—how objects fall, how water flows, how the planets move. Equations have proved crucial in these endeavors because they capture relationships and make precise predictions possible. How could we expect to understand the most complex object in the universe without turning to mathematics? — The answer is we can’t, and that is why I wrote this book. While I’ve been studying and working in the field for over a decade, most people I encounter have no idea what “computational neuroscience” is or that it even exists. Yet a desire to understand how the brain works is a common and very human interest. I wrote this book to let people in on the ways in which the brain will ultimately be understood: through mathematical and computational theories. — At the same time, I know that both mathematics and brain science are on their own intimidating topics to the average reader and may seem downright prohibitory when put together. That is why I’ve avoided (many) equations in the book and focused instead on the driving reasons why scientists have turned to mathematical modeling, what these models have taught us about the brain, and how some surprising interactions between biologists, physicists, mathematicians, and engineers over centuries have laid the groundwork for the future of neuroscience. — Each chapter of Models of the Mind covers a separate topic in neuroscience, starting from individual neurons themselves and building up to the different populations of neurons and brain regions that support memory, vision, movement and more. These chapters document the history of how mathematics has woven its way into biology and the exciting advances this collaboration has in store.