Rethinking assumptions about how trial and nuisance variability impact neural task performance in a fast-processing regime.

Task performance is determined not only by the amount of task-relevant signal present in our brains but also by the presence of noise, which can arise from multiple sources. Internal noise, or "trial variability," manifests as trial-by-trial variations in neural responses under seemingly identical conditions. External factors can also translate into noise, particularly when a task requires extraction of a particular type of information from our environment amid changes in other task-irrelevant "nuisance" parameters. To better understand how signal, trial variability, and nuisance variability combine to determine neural task performance, we explored their interactions, both in simulation and when applied to recorded neural data. This exploration revealed that trial variability is typically larger than a neuron's task-relevant signal for tasks with fast reaction times, where spike count integration windows are short. In this low signal-to-trial variability regime, nuisance variability has the counterintuitive property of having a negligible impact on single-neuron task performance, even when it dominates the task-relevant signal. The inconsequential impact of nuisance variability on individual neurons also extends to descriptions of population performance, under the assumption that both trial and nuisance variability are uncorrelated between neurons. These results demonstrate that some basic intuitions about neural coding are misguided in the context of a fast-processing, low-spike-count regime. NEW & NOTEWORTHY Many everyday tasks require us to extract specific information from our environment while ignoring other things. When the neurons in our brains that carry task-relevant signals are also modulated by task-irrelevant "nuisance" information, nuisance modulation is expected to act as performance-limiting noise. Using both simulated and recorded neural data, we demonstrate that these intuitions are misguided when the brain operates in a fast-processing, low-spike-count regime, where nuisance variability is largely inconsequential for performance.

[1]  Eero P. Simoncelli,et al.  Dissociation of Choice Formation and Choice-Correlated Activity in Macaque Visual Cortex , 2017, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[2]  J. Maunsell,et al.  Attention improves performance primarily by reducing interneuronal correlations , 2009, Nature Neuroscience.

[3]  Nicole C. Rust,et al.  Signals in inferotemporal and perirhinal cortex suggest an “untangling” of visual target information , 2013, Nature Neuroscience.

[4]  B. Cumming,et al.  Macaque V2 Neurons, But Not V1 Neurons, Show Choice-Related Activity , 2006, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[5]  Nicole C Rust,et al.  Quantifying the signals contained in heterogeneous neural responses and determining their relationships with task performance. , 2014, Journal of neurophysiology.

[6]  David D. Cox,et al.  What response properties do individual neurons need to underlie position and clutter "invariant" object recognition? , 2009, Journal of neurophysiology.

[7]  Ha Hong,et al.  Explicit information for category-orthogonal object properties increases along the ventral stream , 2016, Nature Neuroscience.

[8]  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.

[9]  Jan Drugowitsch,et al.  Multiplicative and Additive Modulation of Neuronal Tuning with Population Activity Affects Encoded Information , 2016, Neuron.

[10]  A. Pouget,et al.  Neural correlations, population coding and computation , 2006, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[11]  David J. Freedman,et al.  Distinct Encoding of Spatial and Nonspatial Visual Information in Parietal Cortex , 2009, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[12]  Tomaso Poggio,et al.  Fast Readout of Object Identity from Macaque Inferior Temporal Cortex , 2005, Science.

[13]  M. Cohen,et al.  Measuring and interpreting neuronal correlations , 2011, Nature Neuroscience.

[14]  Tomaso Poggio,et al.  Trade-Off between Object Selectivity and Tolerance in Monkey Inferotemporal Cortex , 2007, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[15]  David D. Cox,et al.  Untangling invariant object recognition , 2007, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

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

[17]  W. Newsome,et al.  Estimates of the Contribution of Single Neurons to Perception Depend on Timescale and Noise Correlation , 2009, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[18]  Matthias Bethge,et al.  Evaluating neuronal codes for inference using Fisher information , 2010, NIPS.

[19]  Xiao-Jing Wang,et al.  The importance of mixed selectivity in complex cognitive tasks , 2013, Nature.

[20]  Naoshige Uchida,et al.  Demixed principal component analysis of neural population data , 2014, eLife.

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

[22]  A. Pouget,et al.  Information-limiting correlations , 2014, Nature Neuroscience.

[23]  W. Newsome,et al.  Context-dependent computation by recurrent dynamics in prefrontal cortex , 2013, Nature.

[24]  Amy M. Ni,et al.  Cognition as a Window into Neuronal Population Space. , 2018, Annual review of neuroscience.

[25]  David J. Freedman,et al.  Independent Category and Spatial Encoding in Parietal Cortex , 2013, Neuron.

[26]  Matthew T. Kaufman,et al.  A category-free neural population supports evolving demands during decision-making , 2014, Nature Neuroscience.

[27]  Noam Roth,et al.  Inferotemporal cortex multiplexes behaviorally-relevant target match signals and visual representations in a manner that minimizes their interference , 2017, bioRxiv.

[28]  M. Shadlen,et al.  Response of Neurons in the Lateral Intraparietal Area during a Combined Visual Discrimination Reaction Time Task , 2002, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[29]  Daeyeol Lee,et al.  Effects of noise correlations on information encoding and decoding. , 2006, Journal of neurophysiology.

[30]  A. Pouget,et al.  Correlations and Neuronal Population Information. , 2016, Annual review of neuroscience.

[31]  James J. DiCarlo,et al.  How Does the Brain Solve Visual Object Recognition? , 2012, Neuron.

[32]  A. Parker,et al.  Sense and the single neuron: probing the physiology of perception. , 1998, Annual review of neuroscience.

[33]  Jay A. Hennig,et al.  Signal Multiplexing and Single-Neuron Computations in Lateral Intraparietal Area During Decision-Making , 2013, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[34]  Dora E Angelaki,et al.  A simple approach to ignoring irrelevant variables by population decoding based on multisensory neurons. , 2016, Journal of neurophysiology.