Biology subjects

Acerbi, L.

Publications and source records attributed to Acerbi, L..

6 recordsLinked to original sources

bioRxiv2024

A common computational and neural anomaly across mouse models of autism

Computational psychiatry has suggested that humans within the autism spectrum disorder (ASD) inflexibly update their expectations (i.e., Bayesian priors). Here, we leveraged high-yield rodent psychophysics (n = 75 mice), extensive behavioral modeling (including principled and heuristics), and (near) brain-wide single cell extracellular recordings (over 53k units in 150 brain areas) to ask (1) whether mice with different genetic perturbations associated with ASD show this same computational anomaly, and if so, (2) what neurophysiological features are shared across genotypes in subserving this deficit. We demonstrate that mice harboring mutations in Fmr1, Cntnap2, and Shank3B show a blunted update of priors during decision-making. Neurally, the differentiating factor between animals flexibly and inflexibly updating their priors was a shift in the weighting of prior encoding from sensory to frontal cortices. Further, in mouse models of ASD frontal areas showed a preponderance of units coding for deviations from the animals long-run prior, and sensory responses did not differentiate between expected and unexpected observations. These findings demonstrate that distinct genetic instantiations of ASD may yield common neurophysiological and behavioral phenotypes.

neuroscience↗

bioRxiv2023

Brain-wide representations of prior information in mouse decision-making

The neural representations of prior information about the state of the world are poorly understood. To investigate them, we examined brain-wide Neuropixels recordings and widefield calcium imaging collected by the International Brain Laboratory. Mice were trained to indicate the location of a visual grating stimulus, which appeared on the left or right with prior probability alternating between 0.2 and 0.8 in blocks of variable length. We found that mice estimate this prior probability and thereby improve their decision accuracy. Furthermore, we report that this subjective prior is encoded in at least 20% to 30% of brain regions which, remarkably, span all levels of processing, from early sensory areas (LGd, VISp) to motor regions (MOs, MOp, GRN) and high level cortical regions (ACAd, ORBvl). This widespread representation of the prior is consistent with a neural model of Bayesian inference involving loops between areas, as opposed to a model in which the prior is incorporated only in decision-making areas. This study offers the first brain-wide perspective on prior encoding at cellular resolution, underscoring the importance of using large scale recordings on a single standardized task.

neuroscience↗

bioRxiv2020

Uncertainty is Maintained and Used in Working Memory

1What are the contents of working memory? In both behavioral and neural computational models, a working memory representation is typically described by a single number, namely a point estimate of a stimulus. Here, we asked if people also maintain the uncertainty associated with a memory, and if people use this uncertainty in subsequent decisions. We collected data in a two-condition orientation change detection task; while both conditions measured whether people used memory uncertainty, only one required maintaining it. For each condition, we compared an optimal Bayesian observer model, in which the observer uses an accurate representation of uncertainty in their decision, to one in which the observer does not. We find that this "Use Uncertainty" model fits better for all participants in both conditions. In the first condition, this result suggests that people use uncertainty optimally in a working memory task when that uncertainty information is available at the time of decision, confirming earlier results. Critically, the results of the second condition suggest that this uncertainty information was maintained in working memory. We test model variants and find that our conclusions do not depend on our assumptions about the observers encoding process, inference process, or decision rule. Our results provide evidence that people have uncertainty that reflects their memory precision on an item-specific level, maintain this information over a working memory delay, and use it implicitly in a way consistent with an optimal observer. These results challenge existing computational models of working memory to update their frameworks to represent uncertainty.

neuroscience↗

bioRxiv2018

Human online adaptation to changes in prior probability

Optimal sensory decision-making requires the combination of uncertain sensory signals with prior expectations. The effect of prior probability is often described as a shift in the decision criterion. Can observers track sudden changes in probability? To answer this question, we used a change-point detection paradigm that is frequently used to examine behavior in changing environments. In a pair of orientation-categorization tasks, we investigated the effects of changing probabilities on decision-making. In both tasks, category probability was updated using a sample-and-hold procedure. We developed an ideal Bayesian change-point detection model in which the observer marginalizes over both the current run length (i.e., time since last change) and the current category probability. We compared this model to various alternative models that correspond to different strategies - from approximately Bayesian to simple heuristics - that the observers may have adopted to update their beliefs about probabilities. We find that probability is estimated following an exponential averaging model with a bias towards equal priors, consistent with a conservative bias. The mechanism underlying change of decision criterion is a combination of on-line estimation of prior probability and a stable, long-term equal-probability prior, thus operating at two very different timescales.\n\nAuthor summaryWe demonstrate how people learn and adapt to changes to the probability of occurrence of one of two categories on decision-making under uncertainty. The study combined psychophysical behavioral tasks with computational modeling. We used two behavioral tasks: a typical forced-choice categorization task as well as one in which the observer specified the decision criterion to use on each trial before the stimulus was displayed. We formulated an ideal Bayesian change-point detection model and compared it to several alternative models. We found that the data are best fit by a model that estimates category probability based on recently observed exemplars with a bias towards equal probability. Our results suggest that the brain takes multiple relevant time scales into account when setting category expectations.

neuroscience↗

bioRxiv2018

The Role of Sensory Uncertainty in Simple Perceptual Organization

Perceptual organization is the process of grouping scene elements into whole entities. A classic example is contour integration, in which separate line segments are perceived as continuous contours. Uncertainty in such grouping arises from scene ambiguity and sensory noise. Some classic Gestalt principles of contour integration, and more broadly, of perceptual organization, have been re-framed in terms of Bayesian inference, whereby the observer computes the probability that the whole entity is present. Previous studies that proposed a Bayesian interpretation of perceptual organization, however, have ignored sensory uncertainty, despite the fact that accounting for the current level of perceptual uncertainty is one the main signatures of Bayesian decision making. Crucially, trial-by-trial manipulation of sensory uncertainty is a key test to whether humans perform near-optimal Bayesian inference in contour integration, as opposed to using some manifestly non-Bayesian heuristic. We distinguish between these hypotheses in a simplified form of contour integration, namely judging whether two line segments separated by an occluder are collinear. We manipulate sensory uncertainty by varying retinal eccentricity. A Bayes-optimal observer would take the level of sensory uncertainty into account - in a very specific way - in deciding whether a measured offset between the line segments is due to non-collinearity or to sensory noise. We find that people deviate slightly but systematically from Bayesian optimality, while still performing "probabilistic computation" in the sense that they take into account sensory uncertainty via a heuristic rule. Our work contributes to an understanding of the role of sensory uncertainty in higher-order perception. Author summaryOur percept of the world is governed not only by the sensory information we have access to, but also by the way we interpret this information. When presented with a visual scene, our visual system undergoes a process of grouping visual elements together to form coherent entities so that we can interpret the scene more readily and meaningfully. For example, when looking at a pile of autumn leaves, one can still perceive and identify a whole leaf even when it is partially covered by another leaf. While Gestalt psychologists have long described perceptual organization with a set of qualitative laws, recent studies offered a statistically-optimal - Bayesian, in statistical jargon - interpretation of this process, whereby the observer chooses the scene configuration with the highest probability given the available sensory inputs. However, these studies drew their conclusions without considering a key actor in this kind of statistically-optimal computations, that is the role of sensory uncertainty. One can easily imagine that our decision on whether two contours belong to the same leaf or different leaves is likely going to change when we move from viewing the pile of leaves at a great distance (high sensory uncertainty), to viewing very closely (low sensory uncertainty). Our study examines whether and how people incorporate uncertainty into contour integration, an elementary form of perceptual organization, by varying sensory uncertainty from trial to trial in a simple contour integration task. We found that people indeed take into account sensory uncertainty, however in a way that subtly deviates from optimal behavior.

neuroscience↗

bioRxiv2017

Bayesian Comparison of Explicit and Implicit Causal Inference Strategies in Multisensory Heading Perception

The precision of multisensory heading perception improves when visual and vestibular cues arising from the same cause, namely motion of the observer through a stationary environment, are integrated. Thus, in order to determine how the cues should be processed, the brain must infer the causal relationship underlying the multisensory cues. In heading perception, however, it is unclear whether observers follow the Bayesian strategy, a simpler non-Bayesian heuristic, or even perform causal inference at all. We developed an efficient and robust computational framework to perform Bayesian model comparison of causal inference strategies, which incorporates a number of alternative assumptions about the observers. With this framework, we investigated whether human observers performance in an explicit cause attribution and an implicit heading discrimination task can be modeled as a causal inference process. In the explicit inference task, all subjects accounted for cue disparity when reporting judgments of common cause, although not necessarily all in a Bayesian fashion. By contrast, but in agreement with previous findings, data from the heading discrimination task only could not rule out that several of the same observers were adopting a forced-fusion strategy, whereby cues are integrated regardless of disparity. Only when we combined evidence from both tasks we were able to rule out forced-fusion in the heading discrimination task. Crucially, findings were robust across a number of variants of models and analyses. Our results demonstrate that our proposed computational framework allows researchers to ask complex questions within a rigorous Bayesian framework that accounts for parameter and model uncertainty.

neuroscience↗