Are integrative, multidisciplinary, and pragmatic models possible? The #PsychMapping experience
This presentation delves into the necessity for simplified models in the field of psychological sciences to cater to a diverse audience of practitioners. We introduce the #PsychMapping model, evaluate its merits and limitations, and discuss its place in contemporary scientific culture. The #PsychMapping model is the product of an extensive literature review, initially within the realm of sport and exercise psychology and subsequently encompassing a broader spectrum of psychological sciences. This model synthesizes the progress made in psychological sciences by categorizing variables into a framework that distinguishes between traits (e.g., body structure and personality) and states (e.g., heart rate and emotions). Furthermore, it delineates internal traits and states from the externalized self, which encompasses behaviour and performance. All three components—traits, states, and the externalized self—are in a continuous interplay with external physical, social, and circumstantial factors. Two core processes elucidate the interactions among these four primary clusters: external perception, encompassing the mechanism through which external stimuli transition into internal events, and self-regulation, which empowers individuals to become autonomous agents capable of exerting control over themselves and their actions. While the model inherently oversimplifies intricate processes, the central question remains: does its pragmatic utility outweigh its limitations, and can it serve as a valuable tool for comprehending human behaviour?
Are integrative, multidisciplinary, and pragmatic models possible? The #PsychMapping experience
This presentation delves into the necessity for simplified models in the field of psychological sciences to cater to a diverse audience of practitioners. We introduce the #PsychMapping model, evaluate its merits and limitations, and discuss its place in contemporary scientific culture. The #PsychMapping model is the product of an extensive literature review, initially within the realm of sport and exercise psychology and subsequently encompassing a broader spectrum of psychological sciences. This model synthesizes the progress made in psychological sciences by categorizing variables into a framework that distinguishes between traits (e.g., body structure and personality) and states (e.g., heart rate and emotions). Furthermore, it delineates internal traits and states from the externalized self, which encompasses behaviour and performance. All three components—traits, states, and the externalized self—are in a continuous interplay with external physical, social, and circumstantial factors. Two core processes elucidate the interactions among these four primary clusters: external perception, encompassing the mechanism through which external stimuli transition into internal events, and self-regulation, which empowers individuals to become autonomous agents capable of exerting control over themselves and their actions. While the model inherently oversimplifies intricate processes, the central question remains: does its pragmatic utility outweigh its limitations, and can it serve as a valuable tool for comprehending human behaviour?
Movements and engagement during decision-making
When experts are immersed in a task, a natural assumption is that their brains prioritize task-related activity. Accordingly, most efforts to understand neural activity during well-learned tasks focus on cognitive computations and task-related movements. Surprisingly, we observed that during decision-making, the cortex-wide activity of multiple cell types is dominated by movements, especially “uninstructed movements”, that are spontaneously expressed. These observations argue that animals execute expert decisions while performing richly varied, uninstructed movements that profoundly shape neural activity. To understand the relationship between these movements and decision-making, we examined the movements more closely. We tested whether the magnitude or the timing of the movements was correlated with decision-making performance. To do this, we partitioned movements into two groups: task-aligned movements that were well predicted by task events (such as the onset of the sensory stimulus or choice) and task independent movement (TIM) that occurred independently of task events. TIM had a reliable, inverse correlation with performance in head-restrained mice and freely moving rats. This hinted that the timing of spontaneous movements could indicate periods of disengagement. To confirm this, we compared TIM to the latent behavioral states recovered by a hidden Markov model with Bernoulli generalized linear model observations (GLM-HMM) and found these, again, to be inversely correlated. Finally, we examined the impact of these behavioral states on neural activity. Surprisingly, we found that the same movement impacts neural activity more strongly when animals are disengaged. An intriguing possibility is that these larger movement signals disrupt cognitive computations, leading to poor decision-making performance. Taken together, these observations argue that movements and cognitionare closely intertwined, even during expert decision-making.
Trading Off Performance and Energy in Spiking Networks
Many engineered and biological systems must trade off performance and energy use, and the brain is no exception. While there are theories on how activity levels are controlled in biological networks through feedback control (homeostasis), it is not clear what the effects on population coding are, and therefore how performance and energy can be traded off. In this talk we will consider this tradeoff in auto-encoding networks, in which there is a clear definition of performance (the coding loss). We first show how SNNs follow a characteristic trade-off curve between activity levels and coding loss, but that standard networks need to be retrained to achieve different tradeoff points. We next formalize this tradeoff with a joint loss function incorporating coding loss (performance) and activity loss (energy use). From this loss we derive a class of spiking networks which coordinates its spiking to minimize both the activity and coding losses -- and as a result can dynamically adjust its coding precision and energy use. The network utilizes several known activity control mechanisms for this --- threshold adaptation and feedback inhibition --- and elucidates their potential function within neural circuits. Using geometric intuition, we demonstrate how these mechanisms regulate coding precision, and thereby performance. Lastly, we consider how these insights could be transferred to trained SNNs. Overall, this work addresses a key energy-coding trade-off which is often overlooked in network studies, expands on our understanding of homeostasis in biological SNNs, as well as provides a clear framework for considering performance and energy use in artificial SNNs.