In this webinar on spatial navigation circuits, three researchers—Ann Hermundstad, Ila Fiete, and Barbara Webb—discussed how diverse species solve navigation problems using specialized yet evolutionarily conserved brain structures. Hermundstad illustrated the fruit fly’s central complex, focusing on how hardwired circuit motifs (e.g., sinusoidal steering curves) enable rapid, flexible learning of goal-directed navigation. This framework combines internal heading representations with modifiable goal signals, leveraging activity-dependent plasticity to adapt to new environments. Fiete explored the mammalian head-direction system, demonstrating how population recordings reveal a one-dimensional ring attractor underlying continuous integration of angular velocity. She showed that key theoretical predictions—low-dimensional manifold structure, isometry, uniform stability—are experimentally validated, underscoring parallels to insect circuits. Finally, Webb described honeybee navigation, featuring path integration, vector memories, route optimization, and the famous waggle dance. She proposed that allocentric velocity signals and vector manipulation within the central complex can encode and transmit distances and directions, enabling both sophisticated foraging and inter-bee communication via dance-based cues.

Efficient navigation requires animals to track their position, velocity and heading direction (HD). Some animals’ behavior suggests that they also track uncertainties about these navigational variables, and make strategic use of these uncertainties, in line with a Bayesian computation. Ring-attractor networks have been proposed to estimate and track these navigational variables, for instance in the HD system of the fruit fly Drosophila. However, such networks are not designed to incorporate a notion of uncertainty, and therefore seem unsuited to implement dynamic Bayesian inference. Here, we close this gap by showing that specifically tuned ring-attractor networks can track both a HD estimate and its associated uncertainty, thereby approximating a circular Kalman filter. We identified the network motifs required to integrate angular velocity observations, e.g., through self-initiated turns, and absolute HD observations, e.g., visual landmark inputs, according to their respective reliabilities, and show that these network motifs are present in the connectome of the Drosophila HD system. Specifically, our network encodes uncertainty in the amplitude of a localized bump of neural activity, thereby generalizing standard ring attractor models. In contrast to such standard attractors, however, proper Bayesian inference requires the network dynamics to operate in a regime away from the attractor state. More generally, we show that near-Bayesian integration is inherent in generic ring attractor networks, and that their amplitude dynamics can account for close-to-optimal reliability weighting of external evidence for a wide range of network parameters. This only holds, however, if their connection strengths allow the network to sufficiently deviate from the attractor state. Overall, our work offers a novel interpretation of ring attractor networks as implementing dynamic Bayesian integrators. We further provide a principled theoretical foundation for the suggestion that the Drosophila HD system may implement Bayesian HD tracking via ring attractor dynamics.

Animals exhibit remarkable learning capabilities with little direct supervision. Likewise, self-supervised learning is an emergent paradigm in artificial intelligence, closing the performance gap to supervised learning. In the context of biology, self-supervised learning corresponds to a setting where one sense or specific stimulus may serve as a supervisory signal for another. After learning, the latter can be used to predict the former. On the implementation level, it has been demonstrated that such predictive learning can occur at the single neuron level, in compartmentalized neurons that separate and associate information from different streams. We demonstrate the power such self-supervised learning over unsupervised (Hebb-like) learning rules, which depend heavily on stimulus statistics, in two examples: First, in the context of animal navigation where predictive learning can associate internal self-motion information always available to the animal with external visual landmark information, leading to accurate path-integration in the dark. We focus on the well-characterized fly head direction system and show that our setting learns a connectivity strikingly similar to the one reported in experiments. The mature network is a quasi-continuous attractor and reproduces key experiments in which optogenetic stimulation controls the internal representation of heading, and where the network remaps to integrate with different gains. Second, we show that incorporating global gating by reward prediction errors allows the same setting to learn conditioning at the neuronal level with mixed selectivity. At its core, conditioning entails associating a neural activity pattern induced by an unconditioned stimulus (US) with the pattern arising in response to a conditioned stimulus (CS). Solving the generic problem of pattern-to-pattern associations naturally leads to emergent cognitive phenomena like blocking, overshadowing, saliency effects, extinction, interstimulus interval effects etc. Surprisingly, we find that the same network offers a reductionist mechanism for causal inference by resolving the post hoc, ergo propter hoc fallacy.

Self-motion through a visual world creates a pattern of expanding visual motion called optic flow. Heading estimation from the optic flow is accurate in rigid environments. But it becomes challenging when other humans introduce an independent motion to the scene. The biological motion of human walkers consists of translation through space and associated limb articulation. The characteristic motion pattern is regular, though complex. A world full of humans moving around is nonrigid, causing heading errors. But limb articulation alone does not perturb the global structure of the flow field, matching the rigidity assumption. For heading perception from optic flow analysis, limb articulation alone should not impair heading estimates. But we observed heading biases when participants encountered a group of point-light walkers. Our research investigates the interactions between optic flow perception and biological motion perception. We further analyze the impact of environmental information.

Tracking heading within an environment is a fundamental requirement for flexible, goal-directed navigation. In insects, a head-direction representation that guides the animal’s movements is maintained in a conserved brain region called the central complex. Two-photon calcium imaging of genetically targeted neural populations in the central complex of tethered fruit flies behaving in virtual reality (VR) environments has shown that the head-direction representation is updated based on self-motion cues and external sensory information, such as visual features and wind direction. Thus far, the head direction representation has mainly been studied in VR settings that only give flies control of the angular rotation of simple sensory cues. How the fly’s head direction circuitry enables the animal to navigate in dynamic, immersive and naturalistic environments is largely unexplored. I have developed a novel setup that permits imaging in complex VR environments that also accommodate flies’ translational movements. I have previously demonstrated that flies perform visually-guided navigation in such an immersive VR setting, and also that they learn to associate aversive optogenetically-generated heat stimuli with specific visual landmarks. A stable head direction representation is likely necessary to support such behaviors, but the underlying neural mechanisms are unclear. Based on a connectomic analysis of the central complex, I identified likely circuit mechanisms for prioritizing and combining different sensory cues to generate a stable head direction representation in complex, multimodal environments. I am now testing these predictions using calcium imaging in genetically targeted cell types in flies performing 2D navigation in immersive VR.

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.

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.

For spatial orientation, heading information can be processed in two different frames of reference, a self-centered egocentric or a viewpoint allocentric frame of reference. Using the most efficient frame of reference is in particular important if an animal migrates over large distances, as it the case for the monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus). These butterflies employ a sun compass to travel over more than 4,000 kilometers to their destination in central Mexico. We developed tetrode recordings from the heading-direction network of tethered flying monarch butterflies that were allowed to orient with respect to a sun stimulus. We show that the neurons switch their frame of reference depending on the animal’s locomotion state. In quiescence, the heading-direction cells encode a sun bearing in an egocentric reference frame, while during active flight, the heading-direction is encoded within an allocentric reference frame. By switching to an allocentric frame of reference during flight, monarch butterflies convert the sun to a global compass cue for long-distance navigation, an ideal strategy for maintaining a migratory heading.

In a cross wind, the direction a fly moves through the air may differ from its heading direction, the direction defined by its body axis. I will present a model based on experimental results that reveals how a heading direction “compass” signal is combined with optic flow to compute and represent the direction that a fly is traveling. This provides a general framework for understand how flies perform vector computations.

Today, considerable information is available on the organization and operation of the neural networks that generate the motor output for animal locomotion, such as swimming, walking, or flying. In recent years, the question of which neural mechanisms are responsible for task-specific and flexible adaptations of locomotor patterns has gained increased attention in the field of motor control. I will report on advances we made with respect to this topic for walking in insects, i.e. the leg muscle control system of phasmids and fruit flies. I will present insights into the neural basis of speed control, heading, walking direction, and the role of ground contact in insect walking, both for local control and intersegmental coordination. For these changes in motor activity modifications in the processing of sensory feedback signals play a pivotal role, for instance for movement and load signals in heading and curve walking or for movement signals that contribute to intersegmental coordination. Our recent findings prompt future investigations that aim to elucidate the mechanisms by which descending and intersegmental signals interact with local networks in the generation of motor flexibility during walking in animals.

Ants, bees and other insects have the ability to return to their nest or hive using a navigation strategy known as path integration. Similarly, fruit flies employ path integration to return to a previously visited food source. An important component of path integration is the ability of the insect to keep track of its heading relative to salient visual cues. A highly conserved brain region known as the central complex has been identified as being of key importance for the computations required for an insect to keep track of its heading. However, the similarities or differences of the underlying heading tracking circuit between species are not well understood. We sought to address this shortcoming by using reverse engineering techniques to derive the effective underlying neural circuits of two evolutionary distant species, the fruit fly and the locust. Our analysis revealed that regardless of the anatomical differences between the two species the essential circuit structure has not changed. Both effective neural circuits have the structural topology of a ring attractor with an eight-fold radial symmetry (Fig. 1). However, despite the strong similarities between the two ring attractors, there remain differences. Using computational modelling we found that two apparently small anatomical differences have significant functional effect on the ability of the two circuits to track fast rotational movements and to maintain a stable heading signal. In particular, the fruit fly circuit responds faster to abrupt heading changes of the animal while the locust circuit maintains a heading signal that is more robust to inhomogeneities in cell membrane properties and synaptic weights. We suggest that the effects of these differences are consistent with the behavioural ecology of the two species. On the one hand, the faster response of the ring attractor circuit in the fruit fly accommodates the fast body saccades that fruit flies are known to perform. On the other hand, the locust is a migratory species, so its behaviour demands maintenance of a defined heading for a long period of time. Our results highlight that even seemingly small differences in the distribution of dendritic fibres can have a significant effect on the dynamics of the effective ring attractor circuit with consequences for the behavioural capabilities of each species. These differences, emerging from morphologically distinct single neurons highlight the importance of a comparative approach to neuroscience.

There has been a surge of publications on using machine learning (ML) on experimental data from physical systems: social, biological, statistical, and quantum. However, can these methods discover fundamentally new physics? It can be that their biggest impact is in better data preprocessing, while inferring new physics is unrealistic without specifically adapting the learning machine to find what we are looking for — that is, without the “intuition” — and hence without having a good a priori guess about what we will find. Is machine learning a useful tool for physics discovery? Which minimal knowledge should we endow the machines with to make them useful in such tasks? How do we do this? Eight speakers below will anchor the workshop, exploring these questions in contexts of diverse systems (from quantum to biological), and from general theoretical advances to specific applications. Each speaker will deliver a 10 min talk with another 10 minutes set aside for moderated questions/discussion. We expect the talks to be broad, bold, and provocative, discussing where the field is heading, and what is needed to get us there.