Linking normative models of natural tasks to descriptive models of neural response

Understanding how nervous systems exploit task-relevant properties of sensory stimuli to perform natural tasks is fundamental to the study of perceptual systems. However, there are few formal methods for determining which stimulus properties are most useful for a given natural task. As a consequence, it is difficult to develop principled models for how to compute task-relevant latent variables from natural signals, and it is difficult to evaluate descriptive models fit to neural response. Accuracy maximization analysis (AMA) is a recently developed Bayesian method for finding the optimal task-specific filters (receptive fields). Here, we introduce AMA–Gauss, a new faster form of AMA that incorporates the assumption that the class-conditional filter responses are Gaussian distributed. Then, we use AMA–Gauss to show that its assumptions are justified for two fundamental visual tasks: retinal speed estimation and binocular disparity estimation. Next, we show that AMA–Gauss has striking formal similarities to popular quadratic models of neural response: the energy model and the generalized quadratic model (GQM). Together, these developments deepen our understanding of why the energy model of neural response have proven useful, improve our ability to evaluate results from subunit model fits to neural data, and should help accelerate psychophysics and neuroscience research with natural stimuli.

[1]  B. Cumming,et al.  Suppressive Mechanisms in Monkey V1 Help to Solve the Stereo Correspondence Problem , 2011, The Journal of Neuroscience.

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

[3]  Bertram E. Shi,et al.  The changing disparity energy model , 2010, Vision Research.

[4]  Johannes Burge,et al.  Accuracy Maximization Analysis for Sensory-Perceptual Tasks: Computational Improvements, Filter Robustness, and Coding Advantages for Scaled Additive Noise , 2017, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[5]  Wilson S. Geisler,et al.  Optimal speed estimation in natural image movies predicts human performance , 2015, Nature Communications.

[6]  I. Ohzawa,et al.  Stereoscopic depth discrimination in the visual cortex: neurons ideally suited as disparity detectors. , 1990, Science.

[7]  D. Williams,et al.  Visibility of interference fringes near the resolution limit. , 1985, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[8]  Jonathan D Victor,et al.  The statistics of local motion signals in naturalistic movies. , 2014, Journal of vision.

[9]  G. DeAngelis Seeing in three dimensions: the neurophysiology of stereopsis , 2000, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

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

[11]  Wilson S. Geisler,et al.  Optimal defocus estimates from individual images for autofocusing a digital camera , 2012, Electronic Imaging.

[12]  M. Ernst,et al.  Humans integrate visual and haptic information in a statistically optimal fashion , 2002, Nature.

[13]  Bruno A. Olshausen,et al.  Learning Intermediate-Level Representations of Form and Motion from Natural Movies , 2012, Neural Computation.

[14]  Michael Eickenberg,et al.  Characterizing Responses of Translation-Invariant Neurons to Natural Stimuli: Maximally Informative Invariant Dimensions , 2012, Neural Computation.

[15]  R. Cook,et al.  Likelihood-Based Sufficient Dimension Reduction , 2009 .

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

[17]  Anqi Wu,et al.  Convolutional spike-triggered covariance analysis for neural subunit models , 2015, NIPS.

[18]  William Bialek,et al.  Statistics of Natural Images: Scaling in the Woods , 1993, NIPS.

[19]  H Sompolinsky,et al.  Simple models for reading neuronal population codes. , 1993, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

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

[21]  Eero P. Simoncelli,et al.  Efficient Sensory Encoding and Bayesian Inference with Heterogeneous Neural Populations , 2014, Neural Computation.

[22]  Nuno Vasconcelos,et al.  Decision-Theoretic Saliency: Computational Principles, Biological Plausibility, and Implications for Neurophysiology and Psychophysics , 2009, Neural Computation.

[23]  Jonathan W. Pillow,et al.  Spectral methods for neural characterization using generalized quadratic models , 2013, NIPS.

[24]  G C DeAngelis,et al.  The physiology of stereopsis. , 2001, Annual review of neuroscience.

[25]  D. G. Albrecht,et al.  Motion selectivity and the contrast-response function of simple cells in the visual cortex , 1991, Visual Neuroscience.

[26]  Wei Ji Ma,et al.  Bayesian inference with probabilistic population codes , 2006, Nature Neuroscience.

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

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

[29]  W. Geisler,et al.  Optimal disparity estimation in natural stereo images. , 2014, Journal of vision.

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

[31]  Eero P. Simoncelli,et al.  Modeling Multiscale Subbands of Photographic Images with Fields of Gaussian Scale Mixtures , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence.

[32]  Brian C. McCann,et al.  Estimating 3D tilt from local image cues in natural scenes , 2016, Journal of vision.

[33]  E H Adelson,et al.  Spatiotemporal energy models for the perception of motion. , 1985, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[34]  Michael J. Berry,et al.  Identifying Functional Bases for Multidimensional Neural Computations , 2013, Neural Computation.

[35]  Peter Dayan,et al.  Cortical Surround Interactions and Perceptual Salience via Natural Scene Statistics , 2012, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[36]  J. P. Jones,et al.  The two-dimensional spectral structure of simple receptive fields in cat striate cortex. , 1987, Journal of neurophysiology.

[37]  Eero P. Simoncelli,et al.  Image quality assessment: from error visibility to structural similarity , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Image Processing.

[38]  Eero P. Simoncelli,et al.  Natural image statistics and neural representation. , 2001, Annual review of neuroscience.

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

[40]  Xue-Xin Wei,et al.  A Bayesian observer model constrained by efficient coding can explain 'anti-Bayesian' percepts , 2015, Nature Neuroscience.

[41]  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.

[42]  G. DeAngelis,et al.  A Logarithmic, Scale-Invariant Representation of Speed in Macaque Middle Temporal Area Accounts for Speed Discrimination Performance , 2005, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[43]  Michael E. Tipping,et al.  Probabilistic Principal Component Analysis , 1999 .

[44]  E. Adelson,et al.  Directionally selective complex cells and the computation of motion energy in cat visual cortex , 1992, Vision Research.

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

[46]  H. Hotelling Analysis of a complex of statistical variables into principal components. , 1933 .

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

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

[49]  R. D. Cook,et al.  NECESSARY AND SUFFICIENT CONDITIONS FOR CONSISTENCY OF A METHOD FOR SMOOTHED FUNCTIONAL INVERSE REGRESSION , 2010 .

[50]  D. G. Albrecht,et al.  Visual cortex neurons in monkeys and cats: Detection, discrimination, and identification , 1997, Visual Neuroscience.

[51]  Izumi Ohzawa,et al.  Mechanisms of stereoscopic vision: the disparity energy model , 1998, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[52]  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.

[53]  Eero P. Simoncelli,et al.  Cardinal rules: Visual orientation perception reflects knowledge of environmental statistics , 2011, Nature Neuroscience.

[54]  Kaare Brandt Petersen,et al.  The Matrix Cookbook , 2006 .

[55]  I. Ohzawa,et al.  Encoding of binocular disparity by complex cells in the cat's visual cortex. , 1996, Journal of neurophysiology.

[56]  Johannes Burge,et al.  Optimal defocus estimation in individual natural images , 2011, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[57]  Jiri Najemnik,et al.  Optimal stimulus encoders for natural tasks. , 2009, Journal of vision.