Stimulus
stimulus presentation
Behavioral Timescale Synaptic Plasticity (BTSP) for biologically plausible credit assignment across multiple layers via top-down gating of dendritic plasticity
A central problem in biological learning is how information about the outcome of a decision or behavior can be used to reliably guide learning across distributed neural circuits while obeying biological constraints. This “credit assignment” problem is commonly solved in artificial neural networks through supervised gradient descent and the backpropagation algorithm. In contrast, biological learning is typically modelled using unsupervised Hebbian learning rules. While these rules only use local information to update synaptic weights, and are sometimes combined with weight constraints to reflect a diversity of excitatory (only positive weights) and inhibitory (only negative weights) cell types, they do not prescribe a clear mechanism for how to coordinate learning across multiple layers and propagate error information accurately across the network. In recent years, several groups have drawn inspiration from the known dendritic non-linearities of pyramidal neurons to propose new learning rules and network architectures that enable biologically plausible multi-layer learning by processing error information in segregated dendrites. Meanwhile, recent experimental results from the hippocampus have revealed a new form of plasticity—Behavioral Timescale Synaptic Plasticity (BTSP)—in which large dendritic depolarizations rapidly reshape synaptic weights and stimulus selectivity with as little as a single stimulus presentation (“one-shot learning”). Here we explore the implications of this new learning rule through a biologically plausible implementation in a rate neuron network. We demonstrate that regulation of dendritic spiking and BTSP by top-down feedback signals can effectively coordinate plasticity across multiple network layers in a simple pattern recognition task. By analyzing hidden feature representations and weight trajectories during learning, we show the differences between networks trained with standard backpropagation, Hebbian learning rules, and BTSP.
Neural signature for accumulated evidence underlying temporal decisions
Cognitive models of timing often include a pacemaker analogue whose ticks are accumulated to form an internal representation of time, and a threshold that determines when a target duration has elapsed. However, clear EEG manifestations of these abstract components have not yet been identified. We measured the EEG of subjects while they performed a temporal bisection task in which they were requested to categorize visual stimuli as short or long in duration. We report an ERP component whose amplitude depends monotonically on the stimulus duration. The relation of the ERP amplitude and stimulus duration can be captured by a simple model, adapted from a known drift-diffusion model for time perception. It includes a noisy accumulator that starts with the stimulus onset and a threshold. If the threshold is reached during stimulus presentation, the stimulus is categorized as "long", otherwise the stimulus is categorized as "short". At the stimulus offset, a response proportional to the distance to the threshold is emitted. This simple model has two parameters that fit both the behavior and ERP amplitudes recorded in the task. Two subsequent experiments replicate and extend this finding to another modality (touch) as well as to different time ranges (subsecond and suprasecond), establishing the described ERP component as a useful handle on the cognitive processes involved in temporal decisions.
NMC4 Short Talk: Directly interfacing brain and deep networks exposes non-hierarchical visual processing
A recent approach to understanding the mammalian visual system is to show correspondence between the sequential stages of processing in the ventral stream with layers in a deep convolutional neural network (DCNN), providing evidence that visual information is processed hierarchically, with successive stages containing ever higher-level information. However, correspondence is usually defined as shared variance between brain region and model layer. We propose that task-relevant variance is a stricter test: If a DCNN layer corresponds to a brain region, then substituting the model’s activity with brain activity should successfully drive the model’s object recognition decision. Using this approach on three datasets (human fMRI and macaque neuron firing rates) we found that in contrast to the hierarchical view, all ventral stream regions corresponded best to later model layers. That is, all regions contain high-level information about object category. We hypothesised that this is due to recurrent connections propagating high-level visual information from later regions back to early regions, in contrast to the exclusively feed-forward connectivity of DCNNs. Using task-relevant correspondence with a late DCNN layer akin to a tracer, we used Granger causal modelling to show late-DCNN correspondence in IT drives correspondence in V4. Our analysis suggests, effectively, that no ventral stream region can be appropriately characterised as ‘early’ beyond 70ms after stimulus presentation, challenging hierarchical models. More broadly, we ask what it means for a model component and brain region to correspond: beyond quantifying shared variance, we must consider the functional role in the computation. We also demonstrate that using a DCNN to decode high-level conceptual information from ventral stream produces a general mapping from brain to model activation space, which generalises to novel classes held-out from training data. This suggests future possibilities for brain-machine interface with high-level conceptual information, beyond current designs that interface with the sensorimotor periphery.
Understanding the role of prediction in sensory encoding
At any given moment the brain receives more sensory information than it can use to guide adaptive behaviour, creating the need for mechanisms that promote efficient processing of incoming sensory signals. One way in which the brain might reduce its sensory processing load is to encode successive presentations of the same stimulus in a more efficient form, a process known as neural adaptation. Conversely, when a stimulus violates an expected pattern, it should evoke an enhanced neural response. Such a scheme for sensory encoding has been formalised in predictive coding theories, which propose that recent experience establishes expectations in the brain that generate prediction errors when violated. In this webinar, Professor Jason Mattingley will discuss whether the encoding of elementary visual features is modulated when otherwise identical stimuli are expected or unexpected based upon the history of stimulus presentation. In humans, EEG was employed to measure neural activity evoked by gratings of different orientations, and multivariate forward modelling was used to determine how orientation selectivity is affected for expected versus unexpected stimuli. In mice, two-photon calcium imaging was used to quantify orientation tuning of individual neurons in the primary visual cortex to expected and unexpected gratings. Results revealed enhanced orientation tuning to unexpected visual stimuli, both at the level of whole-brain responses and for individual visual cortex neurons. Professor Mattingley will discuss the implications of these findings for predictive coding theories of sensory encoding. Professor Jason Mattingley is a Laureate Fellow and Foundation Chair in Cognitive Neuroscience at The University of Queensland. His research is directed toward understanding the brain processes that support perception, selective attention and decision-making, in health and disease.
Matlab in neuroimaging (Part 2): Stimulus presentation and response collection with Psychtoolbox
Second in a three-part lecture series about using matlab in neuroimaging. For full details: https://mailchi.mp/b3f65bbc346d/onneuro-7885485
Tips of MRI Data Acquisition at CCBBI
MRI data quality is crucial to the result. This workshop talks some aspects we need to pay attention during the data acquisition, including FoV/slice brain coverage, synchronization between image acquisition and stimulus presentation, instruction to participant, real time quality monitoring, the usage of physiological data. Prior to the meeting, we are collecting questions for Xiangrui on anything related to mri protocol/parameters: https://www.tricider.com/admin/2YW93TsWZJ3/2DBkJUoE5Ot