Topic: Generalizability

Seminar
7 seminars

Domains featuring this topic

Explore the domains where this topic appears.

SeminarDeep Learning

Use case determines the validity of neural systems comparisons

Erin Grant
Gatsby Computational Neuroscience Unit & Sainsbury Wellcome Centre at University College London
Oct 16, 2024

Deep learning provides new data-driven tools to relate neural activity to perception and cognition, aiding scientists in developing theories of neural computation that increasingly resemble biological systems both at the level of behavior and of neural activity. But what in a deep neural network should correspond to what in a biological system? This question is addressed implicitly in the use of comparison measures that relate specific neural or behavioral dimensions via a particular functional form. However, distinct comparison methodologies can give conflicting results in recovering even a known ground-truth model in an idealized setting, leaving open the question of what to conclude from the outcome of a systems comparison using any given methodology. Here, we develop a framework to make explicit and quantitative the effect of both hypothesis-driven aspects—such as details of the architecture of a deep neural network—as well as methodological choices in a systems comparison setting. We demonstrate via the learning dynamics of deep neural networks that, while the role of the comparison methodology is often de-emphasized relative to hypothesis-driven aspects, this choice can impact and even invert the conclusions to be drawn from a comparison between neural systems. We provide evidence that the right way to adjudicate a comparison depends on the use case—the scientific hypothesis under investigation—which could range from identifying single-neuron or circuit-level correspondences to capturing generalizability to new stimulus properties

SeminarMathematical ModelingRecording

Mathematical and computational modelling of ocular hemodynamics: from theory to applications

Giovanna Guidoboni
University of Maine
Nov 14, 2023

Changes in ocular hemodynamics may be indicative of pathological conditions in the eye (e.g. glaucoma, age-related macular degeneration), but also elsewhere in the body (e.g. systemic hypertension, diabetes, neurodegenerative disorders). Thanks to its transparent fluids and structures that allow the light to go through, the eye offers a unique window on the circulation from large to small vessels, and from arteries to veins. Deciphering the causes that lead to changes in ocular hemodynamics in a specific individual could help prevent vision loss as well as aid in the diagnosis and management of diseases beyond the eye. In this talk, we will discuss how mathematical and computational modelling can help in this regard. We will focus on two main factors, namely blood pressure (BP), which drives the blood flow through the vessels, and intraocular pressure (IOP), which compresses the vessels and may impede the flow. Mechanism-driven models translates fundamental principles of physics and physiology into computable equations that allow for identification of cause-to-effect relationships among interplaying factors (e.g. BP, IOP, blood flow). While invaluable for causality, mechanism-driven models are often based on simplifying assumptions to make them tractable for analysis and simulation; however, this often brings into question their relevance beyond theoretical explorations. Data-driven models offer a natural remedy to address these short-comings. Data-driven methods may be supervised (based on labelled training data) or unsupervised (clustering and other data analytics) and they include models based on statistics, machine learning, deep learning and neural networks. Data-driven models naturally thrive on large datasets, making them scalable to a plethora of applications. While invaluable for scalability, data-driven models are often perceived as black- boxes, as their outcomes are difficult to explain in terms of fundamental principles of physics and physiology and this limits the delivery of actionable insights. The combination of mechanism-driven and data-driven models allows us to harness the advantages of both, as mechanism-driven models excel at interpretability but suffer from a lack of scalability, while data-driven models are excellent at scale but suffer in terms of generalizability and insights for hypothesis generation. This combined, integrative approach represents the pillar of the interdisciplinary approach to data science that will be discussed in this talk, with application to ocular hemodynamics and specific examples in glaucoma research.

SeminarBrain ImagingRecording

The organization of neural representations for control

David Badre
Brown University
Dec 10, 2021

Cognitive control allows us to think and behave flexibly based on our context and goals. Most theories of cognitive control propose a control representation that enables the same input to produce different outputs contingent on contextual factors. In this talk, I will focus on an important property of the control representation's neural code: its representational dimensionality. Dimensionality of a neural representation balances a basic separability/generalizability trade-off in neural computation. This tradeoff has important implications for cognitive control. In this talk, I will present initial evidence from fMRI and EEG showing that task representations in the human brain leverage both ends of this tradeoff during flexible behavior.

SeminarCognitionRecording

Timing errors and decision making

Fuat Balci
University of Manitoba
Nov 30, 2021

Error monitoring refers to the ability to monitor one's own task performance without explicit feedback. This ability is studied typically in two-alternative forced-choice (2AFC) paradigms. Recent research showed that humans can also keep track of the magnitude and direction of errors in different magnitude domains (e.g., numerosity, duration, length). Based on the evidence that suggests a shared mechanism for magnitude representations, we aimed to investigate whether metric error monitoring ability is commonly governed across different magnitude domains. Participants reproduced/estimated temporal, numerical, and spatial magnitudes after which they rated their confidence regarding first order task performance and judged the direction of their reproduction/estimation errors. Participants were also tested in a 2AFC perceptual decision task and provided confidence ratings regarding their decisions. Results showed that variability in reproductions/estimations and metric error monitoring ability, as measured by combining confidence and error direction judgements, were positively related across temporal, spatial, and numerical domains. Metacognitive sensitivity in these metric domains was also positively associated with each other but not with metacognitive sensitivity in the 2AFC perceptual decision task. In conclusion, the current findings point at a general metric error monitoring ability that is shared across different metric domains with limited generalizability to perceptual decision-making.

SeminarPsychology

Inclusive Human Participant Research

Pollyanna Sheehan, Arnelle Etiennt
University of Bristol, Carnegie Mellon University
Jun 23, 2021

Human participant research is somehow both antithetical and complementary to science. On the one hand, working with human participants provides incredibly rich and complex data with ‘real-world’ ecological validity. On the other, this richness is due to the incredible number of variables which uncontrollably become intertwined with your research interest, potentially limiting the conclusions you can draw from your work. Historical over-representation of white men as research participants, coupled with often overly-stringent exclusion criteria has led to a diversity crisis in human participant research. For our research to be truly inclusive, representative and generalisable to the rest of the population, our data must be collected from diverse individuals. This session will explore common barriers to diversity in studies with human participants, and will provide guidance on how to make sure your own research is accessible and inclusive.

SeminarPsychology

A Manifesto for Big Team Science

Patrick S Forscher
Université Grenoble Alpes
Mar 11, 2021

Progress in psychology has been frustrated by challenges concerning replicability, generalizability, strategy selection, inferential reproducibility, and computational reproducibility. Although often discussed separately, I argue that these five challenges share a common cause: insufficient investment of resources into the typical psychology study. I further suggest that big team science can help address these challenges by allowing researchers to pool their resources to efficiently and drastically increase the amount of resources available for a single study. However, the current incentives, infrastructure, and institutions in academic science have all developed under the assumption that science is conducted by solo Principal Investigators and their dependent trainees. These barriers must be overcome if big team science is to be sustainable. Big team science likely also carries unique risks, such as the potential for big team science institutions to monopolize power, become overly conservative, make mistakes at a grand scale, or fail entirely due to mismanagement and a lack of financial sustainability. I illustrate the promise, barriers, and risks of big team science with the experiences of the Psychological Science Accelerator, a global research network of over 1400 members from 70+ countries.

SeminarCognitionRecording

One Instructional Sequence Fits all? A Conceptual Analysis of the Applicability of Concreteness Fading

Dr Tommi Kokkonen / Prof Lennart Schalk
University of Helsinki / University of Education Schwyz
Feb 11, 2021

According to the concreteness fading approach, instruction should start with concrete representations and progress stepwise to representations that are more idealized. Various researchers have suggested that concreteness fading is a broadly applicable instructional approach. In this talk, we conceptually analyze examples of concreteness fading in mathematics and various science domains. In this analysis, we draw on theories of analogical and relational reasoning and on the literature about learning with multiple representations. Furthermore, we report on an experimental study in which we employed concreteness fading in advanced physics education. The results of the conceptual analysis and the experimental study indicate that concreteness fading may not be as generalizable as has been suggested. The reasons for this limited generalizability are twofold. First, the types of representations and the relations between them differ across different domains. Second, the instructional goals between domains and the subsequent roles of the representations vary.

We use essential cookies to run the site. Analytics cookies are optional and help us improve World Wide. Learn more.