Event Abstract

Back to Event

The stochastic network dynamics underlying perceptual discrimination

Genis Prat-Ortega1, 2*, Klaus Wimmer2, Alex Roxin1 and Jaime De La Rocha2
  • 1 Centre de Recerca Matemàtica, Spain
  • 2 IDIBAPS, Spain

The brain is able to interpret streams of high-dimensional ambiguous information and yield coherent percepts. The mechanisms governing sensory integration have been extensively characterized using time-varying visual stimuli (Britten et al. 1996; Roitman and Shadlen 2002), but some of the basic principles regarding the network dynamics underlying this process remain largely unknown. We captured the basic features of a neural integrator using three canonical one-dimensional models: (1) the Drift Diffusion Model (DDM), (2) the Perfect Integrator (PI) which is a particular case of the DDM where the bounds are set to infinity and (3) the double-well potential (DW) which captures the dynamics of the attractor networks (Wang 2002; Roxin and Ledberg 2008). Although these models has been widely studied (Bogacz et al. 2006; Roxin and Ledberg 2008; Gold and Shadlen 2002), it has been difficult to experimentally discriminate among them because most of the observables measured are only quantitatively different among these models (e.g. psychometric curves). Here we aim to find experimentally measurable quantities that can yield qualitatively different behaviors depending on the nature of the underlying network dynamics. We examined the categorization dynamics of these models in response to fluctuating stimuli of different duration (T). On each time step, stimuli are drawn from a Gaussian distribution N(μ, σ) and the two stimulus categories are defined by μ > 0 and μ < 0. Psychometric curves can therefore be obtained by quantifying the probability of the integrator to yield one category versus μ . We find however that varying σ can reveal more clearly the differences among the different integrators. In the small σ regime, both the DW and the DDM perform transient integration and exhibit a decaying stimulus reverse correlation kernel revealing a primacy effect (Nienborg and Cumming 2009; Wimmer et al. 2015) . In the large σ regime, the integration in the DDM becomes even more transient (i.e. the bound is reached earlier during the stimulus) but in the DW the rate of reversed classifications increases and the kernel changes from monotonically decreasing to monotonically increasing revealing a recency effect. In contrast the PI performs uniform integration and shows a constant kernel for all σ's. The discrimination sensitivity in the PI decreases monotonically as 1/σ just because the two stimulus categories become less separable in the stimulus space. In the DDM the decrease with σ is even more pronounced due to the reduction of the effective integration time (the average time to reach the bound). Unexpectedly however, the sensitivity in the DW shows a non-monotonic behavior with a local maximum for Ts beyond a critical value. This is because, provided there is enough time to reverse the initial classification, the increase in the rate of correcting reversals compensates for the decrease in stimulus separability. Finally, we also found that the three models behave differently with σ when the initial condition of the integrator is offset (e.g. representing that the prior probabilities of the two stimulus categories are uneven): increasing σ decreases the choice bias caused by the offset in the DW model, increases the bias for the DDM model and leaves it unchanged in the PI model. We propose specific ways to test these predictions in a random duration two alternative forced-choice (2AFC) task which could help us pinning down the basic principles of sensory integration dynamics.

References

Bogacz, Rafal, Eric Brown, Jeff Moehlis, Philip Holmes, and Jonathan D. Cohen. 2006. “The Physics of Optimal Decision Making: A Formal Analysis of Models of Performance in Two-Alternative Forced-Choice Tasks.” Psychological Review 113 (4): 700–765. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.113.4.700.
Britten, K. H., W. T. Newsome, M. N. Shadlen, S. Celebrini, and J. A. Movshon. 1996. “A Relationship between Behavioral Choice and the Visual Responses of Neurons in Macaque MT.” Visual Neuroscience 13 (01): 87–100. doi:10.1017/S095252380000715X.
Gold, Joshua I., and Michael N. Shadlen. 2002. “Banburismus and the Brain: Decoding the Relationship between Sensory Stimuli, Decisions, and Reward.” Neuron 36 (2): 299–308. doi:10.1016/S0896-6273(02)00971-6.
Nienborg, Hendrikje, and Bruce G. Cumming. 2009. “Decision-Related Activity in Sensory Neurons Reflects More than a Neuron’s Causal Effect.” Nature 459 (7243): 89–92. doi:10.1038/nature07821.
Roitman, Jamie D., and Michael N. Shadlen. 2002. “Response of Neurons in the Lateral Intraparietal Area during a Combined Visual Discrimination Reaction Time Task.” The Journal of Neuroscience 22 (21): 9475–89.
Roxin, Alex, and Anders Ledberg. 2008. “Neurobiological Models of Two-Choice Decision Making Can Be Reduced to a One-Dimensional Nonlinear Diffusion Equation.” PLoS Comput Biol 4 (3): e1000046. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000046.
Wang, Xiao-Jing. 2002. “Probabilistic Decision Making by Slow Reverberation in Cortical Circuits.” Neuron 36 (5): 955–68. doi:10.1016/S0896-6273(02)01092-9.
Wimmer, Klaus, Albert Compte, Alex Roxin, Diogo Peixoto, Alfonso Renart, and Jaime de la Rocha. 2015. “Sensory Integration Dynamics in a Hierarchical Network Explains Choice Probabilities in Cortical Area MT.” Nature Communications 6 (February). doi:10.1038/ncomms7177.

Keywords: Decision Making, network dynamics, attractor dynamics, Drift diffusion model, perfect integrator

Conference: B·DEBATE | A Dialogue with the Cerebral Cortex: Cortical Function and Interfacing (Workshop), Barcelona, Spain, 29 Apr - 30 Apr, 2015.

Presentation Type: Poster Presentation

Topic: SESSION 1: Cortical Function and Computations

Citation: Prat-Ortega G, Wimmer K, Roxin A and De La Rocha J (2015). The stochastic network dynamics underlying perceptual discrimination. Front. Syst. Neurosci. Conference Abstract: B·DEBATE | A Dialogue with the Cerebral Cortex: Cortical Function and Interfacing (Workshop). doi: 10.3389/conf.fnsys.2015.06.00012

Copyright: The abstracts in this collection have not been subject to any Frontiers peer review or checks, and are not endorsed by Frontiers. They are made available through the Frontiers publishing platform as a service to conference organizers and presenters.

The copyright in the individual abstracts is owned by the author of each abstract or his/her employer unless otherwise stated.

Each abstract, as well as the collection of abstracts, are published under a Creative Commons CC-BY 4.0 (attribution) licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) and may thus be reproduced, translated, adapted and be the subject of derivative works provided the authors and Frontiers are attributed.

For Frontiers’ terms and conditions please see https://www.frontiersin.org/legal/terms-and-conditions.

Received: 21 Apr 2015; Published Online: 06 May 2015.

* Correspondence: Mr. Genis Prat-Ortega, Centre de Recerca Matemàtica, Bellaterra, Barcelona, 08193, Spain, gprat@crm.cat