Selectivity, hyperselectivity, and the tuning of V1 neurons.

In this article, we explore two forms of selectivity in sensory neurons. The first we call classic selectivity, referring to the stimulus that optimally stimulates a neuron. If a neuron is linear, then this stimulus can be determined by measuring the response to an orthonormal basis set (the receptive field). The second type of selectivity we call hyperselectivity; it is either implicitly or explicitly a component of several models including sparse coding, gain control, and some linear-nonlinear models. Hyperselectivity is unrelated to the stimulus that maximizes the response. Rather, it refers to the drop-off in response around that optimal stimulus. We contrast various models that produce hyperselectivity by comparing the way each model curves the iso-response surfaces of each neuron. We demonstrate that traditional sparse coding produces such curvature and increases with increasing degrees of overcompleteness. We demonstrate that this curvature produces a systematic misestimation of the optimal stimulus when the neuron's receptive field is measured with spots or gratings. We also show that this curvature allows for two apparently paradoxical results. First, it allows a neuron to be very narrowly tuned (hyperselective) to a broadband stimulus. Second, it allows neurons to break the Gabor-Heisenberg limit in their localization in space and frequency. Finally, we argue that although gain-control models, some linear-nonlinear models, and sparse coding have much in common, we believe that this approach to hyperselectivity provides a deeper understanding of why these nonlinearities are present in the early visual system.

[1]  C. Zetzsche,et al.  Nonlinear and higher-order approaches to the encoding of natural scenes , 2005, Network.

[2]  Eero P. Simoncelli,et al.  Neural Quadratic Discriminant Analysis: Nonlinear Decoding with V1-Like Computation , 2016, Neural Computation.

[3]  David J. Field,et al.  How Close Are We to Understanding V1? , 2005, Neural Computation.

[4]  Richard F Murray,et al.  Classification images: A review. , 2011, Journal of vision.

[5]  Kedarnath P. Vilankar,et al.  Conjectures regarding the nonlinear geometry of visual neurons , 2016, Vision Research.

[6]  D. Field,et al.  The structure and symmetry of simple-cell receptive-field profiles in the cat’s visual cortex , 1986, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B. Biological Sciences.

[7]  Ha Hong,et al.  Performance-optimized hierarchical models predict neural responses in higher visual cortex , 2014, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[8]  David J. Field,et al.  What Is the Goal of Sensory Coding? , 1994, Neural Computation.

[9]  C. Zetzsche,et al.  Nonlinear and extra-classical receptive field properties and the statistics of natural scenes. , 2001 .

[10]  Ryan J. Prenger,et al.  Nonlinear V1 responses to natural scenes revealed by neural network analysis , 2004, Neural Networks.

[11]  P Kuyper,et al.  Triggered correlation. , 1968, IEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering.

[12]  S. W. Kuffler Discharge patterns and functional organization of mammalian retina. , 1953, Journal of neurophysiology.

[13]  Geoffrey E. Hinton,et al.  ImageNet classification with deep convolutional neural networks , 2012, Commun. ACM.

[14]  Christopher J. Rozell,et al.  Visual Nonclassical Receptive Field Effects Emerge from Sparse Coding in a Dynamical System , 2013, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[15]  J. Daugman Uncertainty relation for resolution in space, spatial frequency, and orientation optimized by two-dimensional visual cortical filters. , 1985, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[16]  Dario L. Ringach,et al.  Reverse correlation in neurophysiology , 2004, Cogn. Sci..

[17]  D. Hubel,et al.  Receptive fields, binocular interaction and functional architecture in the cat's visual cortex , 1962, The Journal of physiology.

[18]  D. Heeger Normalization of cell responses in cat striate cortex , 1992, Visual Neuroscience.

[19]  Marcelo O Magnasco,et al.  Human time-frequency acuity beats the Fourier uncertainty principle. , 2012, Physical review letters.

[20]  J. P. Jones,et al.  An evaluation of the two-dimensional Gabor filter model of simple receptive fields in cat striate cortex. , 1987, Journal of neurophysiology.

[21]  D. Gabor,et al.  Theory of communication. Part 1: The analysis of information , 1946 .

[22]  D. G. Albrecht,et al.  Cortical neurons: Isolation of contrast gain control , 1992, Vision Research.

[23]  David J. Field,et al.  An attempt towards a unified account of non-linearities in visual neurons , 2004 .

[24]  C. Zetzsche,et al.  Fundamental limits of linear filters in the visual processing of two-dimensional signals , 1990, Vision Research.

[25]  David D. Cox,et al.  Measuring and Understanding Sensory Representations within Deep Networks Using a Numerical Optimization Framework , 2015, ArXiv.

[26]  Bruno A. Olshausen,et al.  Highly overcomplete sparse coding , 2013, Electronic Imaging.

[27]  D. Heeger,et al.  Comparison of contrast-normalization and threshold models of the responses of simple cells in cat striate cortex , 1997, Visual Neuroscience.

[28]  W. Heisenberg Über den anschaulichen Inhalt der quantentheoretischen Kinematik und Mechanik , 1927 .

[29]  H. Barlow Summation and inhibition in the frog's retina , 1953, The Journal of physiology.

[30]  David J. Field,et al.  Sparse coding with an overcomplete basis set: A strategy employed by V1? , 1997, Vision Research.

[31]  G. Leuba,et al.  Changes in volume, surface estimate, three-dimensional shape and total number of neurons of the human primary visual cortex from midgestation until old age , 1994, Anatomy and Embryology.

[32]  J. Gallant,et al.  Predicting neuronal responses during natural vision , 2005, Network.

[33]  Jessika Weiss,et al.  Vision Science Photons To Phenomenology , 2016 .

[34]  Eero P. Simoncelli,et al.  Spatiotemporal Elements of Macaque V1 Receptive Fields , 2005, Neuron.

[35]  C. Zetzsche,et al.  Nonlinear and extra-classical receptive field properties and the statistics of natural scenes , 2001, Network.

[36]  David J. Field,et al.  Emergence of simple-cell receptive field properties by learning a sparse code for natural images , 1996, Nature.

[37]  Feng Qi Han,et al.  Excitatory and suppressive receptive field subunits in awake monkey primary visual cortex (V1) , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[38]  Thomas Serre,et al.  Towards a Theory of Computation in the Visual Cortex , 2017 .

[39]  Eero P. Simoncelli,et al.  Natural signal statistics and sensory gain control , 2001, Nature Neuroscience.

[40]  D. G. Albrecht,et al.  Cortical cells ; Bar and edge detectors, or spatial frequency filters , 1978 .

[41]  M. Carandini,et al.  Normalization as a canonical neural computation , 2011, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[42]  Thomas Serre,et al.  Towards a Unified Model of Classical and Extra-Classical Receptive Fields , 2016 .

[43]  Eero P. Simoncelli,et al.  Spike-triggered characterization of excitatory and suppressive stimulus dimensions in monkey V1 , 2004, Neurocomputing.

[44]  Eero P. Simoncelli,et al.  A Convolutional Subunit Model for Neuronal Responses in Macaque V1 , 2015, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[45]  Robert A. Frazor,et al.  Independence of luminance and contrast in natural scenes and in the early visual system , 2005, Nature Neuroscience.

[46]  I. Rentschler,et al.  Intrinsic two-dimensional features as textons. , 1998, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[47]  Eero P. Simoncelli,et al.  Efficient and direct estimation of a neural subunit model for sensory coding , 2012, NIPS.

[48]  Eero P. Simoncelli,et al.  Spike-triggered neural characterization. , 2006, Journal of vision.

[49]  Nicole C. Rust,et al.  Selectivity and Tolerance (“Invariance”) Both Increase as Visual Information Propagates from Cortical Area V4 to IT , 2010, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[50]  Gerhard Krieger,et al.  The atoms of vision: Cartesian or polar? , 1999 .

[51]  John Daugman,et al.  An information-theoretic view of analog representation in striate cortex , 1993 .

[52]  Michael S. Lewicki,et al.  A Hierarchical Bayesian Model for Learning Nonlinear Statistical Regularities in Nonstationary Natural Signals , 2005, Neural Computation.

[53]  H. K. Hartline,et al.  INHIBITION IN THE EYE OF LIMULUS , 1956, The Journal of general physiology.

[54]  Tatyana O Sharpee,et al.  Computational identification of receptive fields. , 2013, Annual review of neuroscience.

[55]  J. Robson,et al.  Spatial-frequency channels in human vision. , 1971, Journal of the Optical Society of America.

[56]  D. Tolhurst,et al.  The effect of threshold on the relationship between the receptive-field profile and the spatial-frequency tuning cure in simple cells of the cat's striate cortex , 1989, Visual Neuroscience.

[57]  D. Heeger,et al.  Modeling the Apparent Frequency-specific Suppression in Simple Cell Responses , 1997, Vision Research.

[58]  S Marcelja,et al.  Mathematical description of the responses of simple cortical cells. , 1980, Journal of the Optical Society of America.

[59]  D. G. Albrecht,et al.  Periodicity of striate-cortex-cell receptive fields. , 1985, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[60]  Eero P. Simoncelli,et al.  Characterizing Neural Gain Control using Spike-triggered Covariance , 2001, NIPS.

[61]  RussLL L. Ds Vnlos,et al.  SPATIAL FREQUENCY SELECTIVITY OF CELLS IN MACAQUE VISUAL CORTEX , 2022 .

[62]  Neil C. Rabinowitz,et al.  Contrast Gain Control in Auditory Cortex , 2011, Neuron.