Sparse Coding in the Neocortex

Sparse coding has been proposed as a guiding principle in neural representations of sensory input, particularly in the visual system. Because sparse codes are defined as representations with low activity ratios – i.e., at any given time a small proportion of neurons active – they are sometimes proposed as a means to help conserve metabolic costs. Although we accept that such metabolic costs play a role in evolutionary selection, we also argue that sparse coding offers a useful solution to the problem of representing natural data because such a scheme allows the system to take advantage of the sparse structure of the sensory environment. Given the highly regular and sparse structure of natural data (e.g., natural scenes), a variety of recent studies suggest that the sparse coding in the cortex is an adaptation that has evolved to offer an efficient strategy for storing and building associations with natural inputs. However, highly selective sparse codes require a large number of neurons and can also pose problems for learning. We argue that larger brains have evolved strategies that allow neurons to be both highly selective and invariant across irrelevant dimensions. We argue that this invariance is what allows such highly sparse codes to be useful.

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

[2]  H. Barlow,et al.  Single Units and Sensation: A Neuron Doctrine for Perceptual Psychology? , 1972, Perception.

[3]  Helga Kolb,et al.  The organization of the turtle inner retina. II. Analysis of color‐coded and directionally selective cells , 1995, The Journal of comparative neurology.

[4]  A. P. Georgopoulos,et al.  Neuronal population coding of movement direction. , 1986, Science.

[5]  H. Kolb,et al.  The organization of the turtle inner retina. I. ON‐ and OFF‐center pathways , 1995, The Journal of comparative neurology.

[6]  R. Wong,et al.  Retinal waves and visual system development. , 1999, Annual review of neuroscience.

[7]  Michael J. Berry,et al.  The structure and precision of retinal spike trains. , 1997, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[8]  Reinhard Wolf,et al.  Visual pattern recognition in Drosophila involves retinotopic matching , 1993, Nature.

[9]  D. V. van Essen,et al.  A neurobiological model of visual attention and invariant pattern recognition based on dynamic routing of information , 1993, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[10]  Bruno A Olshausen,et al.  Sparse coding of sensory inputs , 2004, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[11]  J. H. Hateren,et al.  Independent component filters of natural images compared with simple cells in primary visual cortex , 1998 .

[12]  M. Soha,et al.  A distributed approach to lan monitoring using intelligent high performance monitors , 1987, IEEE Network.

[13]  Edmund T. Rolls,et al.  Functions of the Primate Temporal Lobe Cortical Visual Areas in Invariant Visual Object and Face Recognition , 2000, Neuron.

[14]  E. Vaadia,et al.  Firing patterns of single units in the prefrontal cortex and neural network models , 1990 .

[15]  D. V. van Essen,et al.  A tension-based theory of morphogenesis and compact wiring in the central nervous system. , 1997, Nature.

[16]  Mandyam V. Srinivasan,et al.  Freely flying bees discriminate between stationary and moving objects: performance and possible mechanisms , 2004, Journal of Comparative Physiology A.

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

[18]  M. DeWeese,et al.  Binary Spiking in Auditory Cortex , 2003, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[19]  T. Squires Optimizing the vertebrate vestibular semicircular canal: could we balance any better? , 2004, Physical review letters.

[20]  B. Sakmann,et al.  ‐Dynamic representation of whisker deflection by synaptic potentials in spiny stellate and pyramidal cells in the barrels and septa of layer 4 rat somatosensory cortex , 2002, The Journal of physiology.

[21]  C. Koch,et al.  Invariant visual representation by single neurons in the human brain , 2005, Nature.

[22]  N. Strausfeld,et al.  Neuronal basis for parallel visual processing in the fly , 1991, Visual Neuroscience.

[23]  Michael S. Lewicki,et al.  Efficient coding of natural sounds , 2002, Nature Neuroscience.

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

[25]  D. Tolhurst,et al.  Characterizing the sparseness of neural codes , 2001, Network.

[26]  D. Ruderman,et al.  INDEPENDENT COMPONENT ANALYSIS OF NATURAL IMAGE SEQUENCES YIELDS SPATIOTEMPORAL FILTERS SIMILAR TO SIMPLE CELLS IN PRIMARY VISUAL CORTEX , 1998 .

[27]  Terrence J. Sejnowski,et al.  The “independent components” of natural scenes are edge filters , 1997, Vision Research.

[28]  J. Gallant,et al.  Natural Stimulation of the Nonclassical Receptive Field Increases Information Transmission Efficiency in V1 , 2002, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[29]  B. Sakmann,et al.  Whisker movements evoked by stimulation of single pyramidal cells in rat motor cortex , 2004, Nature.

[30]  J. V. van Hateren,et al.  Independent component filters of natural images compared with simple cells in primary visual cortex , 1998, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[31]  B. A. Baldwin,et al.  Cells in temporal cortex of conscious sheep can respond preferentially to the sight of faces. , 1987, Science.

[32]  P. Best,et al.  Place cells and silent cells in the hippocampus of freely-behaving rats , 1989, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[33]  E T Rolls,et al.  Sparseness of the neuronal representation of stimuli in the primate temporal visual cortex. , 1995, Journal of neurophysiology.

[34]  Daniel J. Graham,et al.  Can the theory of “whitening” explain the center-surround properties of retinal ganglion cell receptive fields? , 2006, Vision Research.

[35]  P. Lennie The Cost of Cortical Computation , 2003, Current Biology.

[36]  Jörg-Peter Ewert,et al.  What is Neuroethology , 1980 .

[37]  D. Ruderman,et al.  Independent component analysis of natural image sequences yields spatio-temporal filters similar to simple cells in primary visual cortex , 1998, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[38]  R. Desimone,et al.  Selectivity and sparseness in the responses of striate complex cells , 2005, Vision Research.

[39]  R. Reid,et al.  Temporal Coding of Visual Information in the Thalamus , 2000, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[40]  M. Sirota,et al.  Activity of Different Classes of Neurons of the Motor Cortex during Locomotion , 2003, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[41]  J L Gallant,et al.  Sparse coding and decorrelation in primary visual cortex during natural vision. , 2000, Science.

[42]  P O Hoyer,et al.  Independent component analysis applied to feature extraction from colour and stereo images , 2000, Network.

[43]  D J Field,et al.  Relations between the statistics of natural images and the response properties of cortical cells. , 1987, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[44]  S. Laughlin,et al.  An Energy Budget for Signaling in the Grey Matter of the Brain , 2001, Journal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism.

[45]  F. Theunissen From synchrony to sparseness , 2003, Trends in Neurosciences.

[46]  Terrence J. Sejnowski,et al.  Slow Feature Analysis: Unsupervised Learning of Invariances , 2002, Neural Computation.

[47]  Glenn C. Turner,et al.  Oscillations and Sparsening of Odor Representations in the Mushroom Body , 2002, Science.

[48]  Aapo Hyvärinen,et al.  Emergence of Phase- and Shift-Invariant Features by Decomposition of Natural Images into Independent Feature Subspaces , 2000, Neural Computation.

[49]  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.

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