A simple model for low variability in neural spike trains

Neural noise sets a limit to information transmission in sensory systems. In several areas, the spiking response (to a repeated stimulus) has shown a higher degree of regularity than predicted by a Poisson process. However, a simple model to explain this low variability is still lacking. Here we introduce a new model, with a correction to Poisson statistics, that can accurately predict the regularity of neural spike trains in response to a repeated stimulus. The model has only two parameters but can reproduce the observed variability in retinal recordings in various conditions. We show analytically why this approximation can work. In a model of the spike-emitting process where a refractory period is assumed, we derive that our simple correction can well approximate the spike train statistics over a broad range of firing rates. Our model can be easily plugged to stimulus processing models, like a linear-nonlinear model or its generalizations, to replace the Poisson spike train hypothesis that is commonly assumed. It estimates the amount of information transmitted much more accurately than Poisson models in retinal recordings. Thanks to its simplicity, this model has the potential to explain low variability in other areas.

[1]  Adam S. Charles,et al.  Dethroning the Fano Factor: a flexible, model-based approach to partitioning neural variability , 2017, bioRxiv.

[2]  H. Barlow,et al.  Three factors limiting the reliable detection of light by retinal ganglion cells of the cat , 1969, The Journal of physiology.

[3]  R. Reid,et al.  Low Response Variability in Simultaneously Recorded Retinal, Thalamic, and Cortical Neurons , 2000, Neuron.

[4]  Michael J. Berry,et al.  Refractoriness and Neural Precision , 1997, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[5]  D. Baylor,et al.  Mosaic arrangement of ganglion cell receptive fields in rabbit retina. , 1997, Journal of neurophysiology.

[6]  Thierry Mora,et al.  Dynamical criticality in the collective activity of a population of retinal neurons. , 2014, Physical review letters.

[7]  J. A. Movshon,et al.  The dependence of response amplitude and variance of cat visual cortical neurones on stimulus contrast , 1981, Experimental Brain Research.

[8]  P. Heggelund,et al.  Response variability and orientation discrimination of single cells in striate cortex of cat , 1978, Experimental Brain Research.

[9]  Jörg W. Müller.  Dead-time problems , 1973 .

[10]  James G. Scott,et al.  Fully Bayesian inference for neural models with negative-binomial spiking , 2012, NIPS.

[11]  J. Movshon.  Reliability of Neuronal Responses , 2000, Neuron.

[12]  Surya Ganguli,et al.  Deep Learning Models of the Retinal Response to Natural Scenes , 2017, NIPS.

[13]  Jörg W. Müller.  Some formulae for a dead-time-distorted Poisson process , 1974 .

[14]  Eero P. Simoncelli,et al.  Partitioning neuronal variability , 2014, Nature Neuroscience.

[15]  Ian H. Stevenson.  Flexible models for spike count data with both over- and under- dispersion , 2016, Journal of Computational Neuroscience.

[16]  D. Snodderly,et al.  Response Variability of Neurons in Primary Visual Cortex (V1) of Alert Monkeys , 1997, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[17]  Pierre Yger,et al.  Multiplexed computations in retinal ganglion cells of a single type , 2016, Nature Communications.

[18]  Marta Pérez-Casany,et al.  Overdispersed and underdispersed Poisson generalizations , 2005 .

[19]  Yuwei Cui,et al.  Inferring Nonlinear Neuronal Computation Based on Physiologically Plausible Inputs , 2013, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[20]  L. Abbott,et al.  Responses of neurons in primary and inferior temporal visual cortices to natural scenes , 1997, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[21]  Anthony M. Zador,et al.  Binary Coding in Auditory Cortex , 2002, NIPS.

[22]  G D Lewen,et al.  Reproducibility and Variability in Neural Spike Trains , 1997, Science.

[23]  J. Assad,et al.  Beyond Poisson: Increased Spike-Time Regularity across Primate Parietal Cortex , 2009, Neuron.

[24]  John P. Cunningham,et al.  High-dimensional neural spike train analysis with generalized count linear dynamical systems , 2015, NIPS.

[25]  Thierry Mora,et al.  Separating intrinsic interactions from extrinsic correlations in a network of sensory neurons , 2018, Physical Review E.

[26]  Andrew M. Clark,et al.  Stimulus onset quenches neural variability: a widespread cortical phenomenon , 2010, Nature Neuroscience.

[27]  Galit Shmueli,et al.  The COM-Poisson model for count data: a survey of methods and applications , 2012 .

[28]  Pierre Yger,et al.  Fast and accurate spike sorting in vitro and in vivo for up to thousands of electrodes , 2016, bioRxiv.

[29]  W. Newsome,et al.  A Comparison of Spiking Statistics in Motion Sensing Neurones of Flies and Monkeys , 2001 .

[30]  Eero P. Simoncelli,et al.  Spatio-temporal correlations and visual signalling in a complete neuronal population , 2008, Nature.

[31]  E J Chichilnisky,et al.  A simple white noise analysis of neuronal light responses , 2001, Network.

[32]  Michael J. Berry,et al.  Mapping a Complete Neural Population in the Retina , 2012, The Journal of Neuroscience.