Search bioRxivSearch

Biology subjects

Park, I. M.

Publications and source records attributed to Park, I. M..

3 recordsLinked to original sources

Myopic control of neural dynamics

Manipulating the dynamics of neural systems through targeted stimulation is a frontier of research and clinical neuroscience; however, the control schemes considered for neural systems are mismatched for the unique needs of manipulating neural dynamics. An appropriate control method should respect the variability in neural systems, incorporating moment to moment \"input\" to the neural dynamics and behaving based on the current neural state, irrespective of the past trajectory. We propose such a controller under a nonlinear state-space feedback framework that steers one dynamical system to function as through it were another dynamical system entirely. This \"myopic\" controller is formulated through a novel variant of a model reference control cost that manipulates dynamics in a short-sighted manner that only sets a target trajectory of a single time step into the future (hence its myopic nature), which omits the need to pre-calculate a rigid and computationally costly neural feedback control solution. To demonstrate the breadth of this controls utility, two examples with distinctly different applications in neuroscience are studied. First, we show the myopic controls utility to probe the causal link between dynamics and behavior for cognitive processes by transforming a winner-take-all decision-making system to operate as a robust neural integrator of evidence. Second, an unhealthy motor-like system containing an unwanted beta-oscillation spiral attractor is controlled to function as a healthy motor system, a relevant clinical example for neurological disorders.

neuroscience

Organization of Neural Population Code in Mouse Visual System

The mammalian visual system consists of several anatomically distinct areas, layers, and cell types. To understand the role of these subpopulations in visual information processing, we analyzed neural signals recorded from excitatory neurons from various anatomical and functional structures. For each of 186 mice, one of six genetically tagged cell-types and one of six visual areas were targeted while the mouse was passively viewing various visual stimuli. We trained linear classifiers to decode one of six visual stimulus categories with distinct spatiotemporal structures from the population neural activity. We found that neurons in both the primary visual cortex and secondary visual areas show varying degrees of stimulus-specific decodability, and neurons in superficial layers tend to be more informative about the stimulus categories. Additional decoding analyses of directional motion were consistent with these findings. We observed synergy in the population code of direction in several visual areas suggesting area-specific organization of information representation across neurons. These differences in decoding capacities shed light on the specialized organization of neural information processing across anatomically distinct subpopulations, and further establish the mouse as a model for understanding visual perception.

neuroscience

Bayesian Efficient Coding

The efficient coding hypothesis, which proposes that neurons are optimized to maximize information about the environment, has provided a guiding theoretical framework for sensory and systems neuroscience. More recently, a theory known as the Bayesian Brain hypothesis has focused on the brains ability to integrate sensory and prior sources of information in order to perform Bayesian inference. Although pieces of a connection between these two hypotheses have appeared in prior work, a general formulation that treats the optimality criterion as an arbitrary functional of the posterior distribution - and thereby admits both information-theoretic and non-information-theoretic objectives within a single formalism - has remained largely implicit. Here we make this formulation explicit, developing a Bayesian theory of efficient coding that defines Bayesian efficient codes in terms of four basic ingredients: (1) a stimulus prior distribution; (2) an encoding model; (3) a capacity constraint, specifying a neural resource limit; and (4) a loss functional, quantifying the desirability or undesirability of various posterior distributions. Classic efficient codes arise as the special case in which the loss functional is the posterior entropy, leading to a code that maximizes mutual information, but alternate loss functionals give solutions that differ dramatically from information-maximizing codes. Within this framework we introduce covtropy, a novel family of posterior-functional losses parameterized by a single exponent, and use it to show that decorrelation of sensory inputs - optimal under classic efficient codes in low-noise settings - can be disadvantageous for objectives that penalize large errors. We then reanalyze Laughlins seminal data on contrast coding in the blowfly large monopolar cell, and find that the measured response nonlinearity is better explained by minimizing Lp reconstruction error with p = 1/2 than by infomax, overturning a forty-year-old interpretation. Bayesian efficient coding thus enlarges the family of normatively optimal codes and provides a more general framework for understanding the design principles of sensory systems. Author summarySensory neurons work under tight budgets. They represent a rich, noisy world with limited spikes, limited dynamic range, and limited energy. Two long-standing ideas address this problem. One, called efficient coding, asks why neurons encode signals in the ways they do: which signals to amplify, which to filter out. A second, the Bayesian brain hypothesis, asks how the brain turns those signals into a percept: how to combine sensory evidence with prior knowledge to form a best guess about the world. We develop a framework that asks both questions at once. An optimal sensory code in our framework is specified by four interlocking ingredients: a prior description of the world, a model of how neurons respond to it, a limit on the resources they can spend, and a rule for what counts as a good internal representation. Classical information-maximizing codes emerge as one special case, one corner of a much larger family of Bayesian efficient codes. Applying this framework to Laughlins 1981 blowfly experiment, long held up as the textbook example of information maximization, we find that the flys neurons are better explained by minimizing decoding error than by maximizing information.

neuroscience