Neuroscience seminars

The hypothalamus controls diverse homeostatic functions including fertility. Neural episode generators are required to drive the intermittent pulsatile and surge profiles of reproductive hormone secretion that control gonadal function. Studies in genetic mouse models have been fundamental in defining the neural circuits forming these central pattern generators and the full range of in vitro and in vivo optogenetic and chemogenetic methodologies have enabled investigation into their mechanism of action. The seminar will outline studies defining the hypothalamic “GnRH pulse generator network” and current understanding of its operation to drive pulsatile hormone secretion.

Detecting the direction of image motion is important for visual navigation, predator avoidance and prey capture, and thus essential for the survival of all animals that have eyes. However, the direction of motion is not explicitly represented at the level of the photoreceptors: it rather needs to be computed by subsequent neural circuits. The exact nature of this process represents a classic example of neural computation and has been a longstanding question in the field. Our results obtained in the fruit fly Drosophila demonstrate that the local direction of motion is computed in two parallel ON and OFF pathways. Within each pathway, a retinotopic array of four direction-selective T4 (ON) and T5 (OFF) cells represents the four Cartesian components of local motion vectors (leftward, rightward, upward, downward). Since none of the presynaptic neurons is directionally selective, direction selectivity first emerges within T4 and T5 cells. Our present research focuses on the cellular and biophysical mechanisms by which the direction of image motion is computed in these neurons.

The ability to record large neural populations—hundreds to thousands of cells simultaneously—is a defining feature of modern systems neuroscience. Aside from improved experimental efficiency, what do these technologies fundamentally buy us? I'll argue that they provide an exciting opportunity to move beyond studying the "average" neural response. That is, by providing dense neural circuit measurements in individual subjects and moments in time, these recordings enable us to track changes across repeated behavioral trials and across experimental subjects. These two forms of variability are still poorly understood, despite their obvious importance to understanding the fidelity and flexibility of neural computations. Scientific progress on these points has been impeded by the fact that individual neurons are very noisy and unreliable. My group is investigating a number of customized statistical models to overcome this challenge. I will mention several of these models but focus particularly on a new framework for quantifying across-subject similarity in stochastic trial-by-trial neural responses. By applying this method to noisy representations in deep artificial networks and in mouse visual cortex, we reveal that the geometry of neural noise correlations is a meaningful feature of variation, which is neglected by current methods (e.g. representational similarity analysis).

We hardly notice when there is a speck on our glasses, the obstructed visual information seems to be magically filled in. The mechanistic basis for this fundamental perceptual phenomenon has, however, remained obscure. What enables neurons in the visual system to respond to context when the stimulus is not available? While feedforward information drives the activity in cortex, feedback information is thought to provide contextual signals that are merely modulatory. We have made the discovery that mouse primary visual cortical neurons are strongly driven by feedback projections from higher visual areas when their feedforward sensory input from the retina is missing. This drive is so strong that it makes visual cortical neurons fire as much as if they were receiving a direct sensory input. These signals are likely used to predict input from the feedforward pathway. Preliminary results show that these feedback projections are strongly influenced by experience and learning.

Epilepsy is a common and disabling neurologic condition affecting adults and children that results from complex dysfunction of neural networks and is ineffectively treated with current therapies in up to one third of patients. This dysfunction can have especially severe consequences in pediatric age group, where neurodevelopment may be irreversibly affected. Furthermore, although seizures are the most obvious manifestation of epilepsy, the cognitive and psychiatric dysfunction that often coexists in patients with this disorder has the potential to be equally disabling. Given these challenges, her research program aims to better understand how epileptic activity disrupts the proper development and function of neural networks, with the overall goal of identifying novel biomarkers and systems level treatments for epileptic disorders and their comorbidities, especially those affecting children.

Research in Neuroscience, as in many scientific disciplines, is undergoing a renaissance based on deep learning. Unique to Neuroscience, deep learning models can be used not only as a tool but interpreted as models of the brain. The central claims of recent deep learning-based models of brain circuits are that they shed light on fundamental functions being optimized or make novel predictions about neural phenomena. We show, through the case-study of grid cells in the entorhinal-hippocampal circuit, that one may get neither. We rigorously examine the claims of deep learning models of grid cells using large-scale hyperparameter sweeps and theory-driven experimentation, and demonstrate that the results of such models are more strongly driven by particular, non-fundamental, and post-hoc implementation choices than fundamental truths about neural circuits or the loss function(s) they might optimize. We discuss why these models cannot be expected to produce accurate models of the brain without the addition of substantial amounts of inductive bias, an informal No Free Lunch result for Neuroscience.

Studies of the mouse visual system have revealed a variety of visual brain areas in a roughly hierarchical arrangement, together with a multitude of behavioral capacities, ranging from stimulus-reward associations, to goal-directed navigation, and object-centric discriminations. However, an overall understanding of the mouse’s visual cortex organization, and how this organization supports visual behaviors, remains unknown. Here, we take a computational approach to help address these questions, providing a high-fidelity quantitative model of mouse visual cortex. By analyzing factors contributing to model fidelity, we identified key principles underlying the organization of mouse visual cortex. Structurally, we find that comparatively low-resolution and shallow structure were both important for model correctness. Functionally, we find that models trained with task-agnostic, unsupervised objective functions, based on the concept of contrastive embeddings were substantially better than models trained with supervised objectives. Finally, the unsupervised objective builds a general-purpose visual representation that enables the system to achieve better transfer on out-of-distribution visual, scene understanding and reward-based navigation tasks. Our results suggest that mouse visual cortex is a low-resolution, shallow network that makes best use of the mouse’s limited resources to create a light-weight, general-purpose visual system – in contrast to the deep, high-resolution, and more task-specific visual system of primates.

A complete neuroscience requires multi-level theories that address phenomena ranging from higher-level cognitive behaviors to activities within a cell. Unfortunately, we don't have cognitive models of behavior whose components can be decomposed into the neural dynamics that give rise to behavior, leaving an explanatory gap. Here, we decompose SUSTAIN, a clustering model of concept learning, into neuron-like units (SUSTAIN-d; decomposed). Instead of abstract constructs (clusters), SUSTAIN-d has a pool of neuron-like units. With millions of units, a key challenge is how to bridge from abstract constructs such as clusters to neurons, whilst retaining high-level behavior. How does the brain coordinate neural activity during learning? Inspired by algorithms that capture flocking behavior in birds, we introduce a neural flocking learning rule to coordinate units that collectively form higher-level mental constructs ("virtual clusters"), neural representations (concept, place and grid cell-like assemblies), and parallels recurrent hippocampal activity. The decomposed model shows how brain-scale neural populations coordinate to form assemblies encoding concept and spatial representations, and why many neurons are required for robust performance. Our account provides a multi-level explanation for how cognition and symbol-like representations are supported by coordinated neural assemblies formed through learning.

Neural computations are currently investigated using two separate approaches: sorting neurons into functional subpopulations or examining the low-dimensional dynamics of collective activity. Whether and how these two aspects interact to shape computations is currently unclear. Using a novel approach to extract computational mechanisms from networks trained on neuroscience tasks, here we show that the dimensionality of the dynamics and subpopulation structure play fundamentally com- plementary roles. Although various tasks can be implemented by increasing the dimensionality in networks with fully random population structure, flexible input–output mappings instead require a non-random population structure that can be described in terms of multiple subpopulations. Our analyses revealed that such a subpopulation structure enables flexible computations through a mechanism based on gain-controlled modulations that flexibly shape the collective dynamics. Our results lead to task-specific predictions for the structure of neural selectivity, for inactivation experiments and for the implication of different neurons in multi-tasking.

There has been increasing interest in the neurocomputational mechanisms underlying psychotic disorders in recent years. One promising approach is based on the theoretical framework of predictive processing, which proposes that inferences regarding the state of the world are made by combining prior beliefs with sensory signals. Delusions and hallucinations are the core symptoms of psychosis and often co-occur. Yet, different predictive-processing alterations have been proposed for these two symptom dimensions, according to which the relative weighting of prior beliefs in perceptual inference is decreased or increased, respectively. I will present recent behavioural, neuroimaging, and computational work that investigated perceptual decision-making under uncertainty and ambiguity to elucidate the changes in predictive processing that may give rise to psychotic experiences. Based on the empirical findings presented, I will provide a more nuanced predictive-processing account that suggests a common mechanism for delusions and hallucinations at low levels of the predictive-processing hierarchy, but still has the potential to reconcile apparently contradictory findings in the literature. This account may help to understand the heterogeneity of psychotic phenomenology and explain changes in symptomatology over time.

On Wednesday, October 26th, at noon ET / 6PM CET, we will host Kara Johnson, PhD, and Ludvic Zrinzo, MD PhD, for the inaugural session of our newly conceived talk series format entitled "Stimulating Brains". Kara A. Johnson, a postdoctoral fellow in Dr. Coralie de Hemptinne’s lab at the University of Florida, will present her work on “Combining imaging and neurophysiology in Parkinson’s disease”. Ludvic Zrinzo, Professor of functional neurosurgery and head of the University College London functional neurosurgery unit, will give us a glimpse at the “Person behind the science”, and give a talk on “Neurosurgery for mental disorders: challenging mindsets”. The talks will be followed by a shared discussion. You can register via talks.stimulatingbrains.org to receive the (free) Zoom link!