Neural Variability Quenching Predicts Individual Perceptual Abilities

Neural activity during repeated presentations of a sensory stimulus exhibits considerable trial-by-trial variability. Previous studies have reported that trial-by-trial neural variability is reduced (quenched) by the presentation of a stimulus. However, the functional significance and behavioral relevance of variability quenching and the potential physiological mechanisms that may drive it have been studied only rarely. Here, we recorded neural activity with EEG as subjects performed a two-interval forced-choice contrast discrimination task. Trial-by-trial neural variability was quenched by ∼40% after the presentation of the stimulus relative to the variability apparent before stimulus presentation, yet there were large differences in the magnitude of variability quenching across subjects. Individual magnitudes of quenching predicted individual discrimination capabilities such that subjects who exhibited larger quenching had smaller contrast discrimination thresholds and steeper psychometric function slopes. Furthermore, the magnitude of variability quenching was strongly correlated with a reduction in broadband EEG power after stimulus presentation. Our results suggest that neural variability quenching is achieved by reducing the amplitude of broadband neural oscillations after sensory input, which yields relatively more reproducible cortical activity across trials and enables superior perceptual abilities in individuals who quench more. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Variability quenching is a phenomenon in which neural variability across trials is reduced by the presentation of a stimulus. Although this phenomenon has been reported across a variety of animal and human studies, its functional significance and behavioral relevance have been examined only rarely. Here, we report novel empirical evidence from humans revealing that variability quenching differs dramatically across individual subjects and explains to a certain degree why some individuals exhibit better perceptual abilities than others. In addition, we found a strong relationship between variability quenching and suppression of broadband neural oscillations. Together, our results reveal the importance of reproducible cortical activity for enabling better perceptual abilities and suggest a potential underlying mechanism that may explain why variability quenching occurs.

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

[2]  P. Rossini,et al.  Pre- and poststimulus alpha rhythms are related to conscious visual perception: a high-resolution EEG study. , 2005, Cerebral cortex.

[3]  F. L. D. Silva,et al.  Event-related EEG/MEG synchronization and desynchronization: basic principles , 1999, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[4]  D G Pelli,et al.  Why use noise? , 1999, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[5]  Arnaud Delorme,et al.  EEGLAB: an open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis , 2004, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.

[6]  Sygal Amitay,et al.  Learning to detect a tone in unpredictable noise. , 2014, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[7]  G. Deco,et al.  Emerging concepts for the dynamical organization of resting-state activity in the brain , 2010, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[8]  Keiichi Kitajo,et al.  Internal noise determines external stochastic resonance in visual perception , 2008, Vision Research.

[9]  F A Wichmann,et al.  Ning for Helpful Comments and Suggestions. This Paper Benefited Con- Siderably from Conscientious Peer Review, and We Thank Our Reviewers the Psychometric Function: I. Fitting, Sampling, and Goodness of Fit , 2001 .

[10]  J. Mumford,et al.  Greater Neural Pattern Similarity Across Repetitions Is Associated with Better Memory , 2010, Science.

[11]  Tatiana Pasternak,et al.  Trial-to-trial variability of the prefrontal neurons reveals the nature of their engagement in a motion discrimination task , 2010, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[12]  G. Legge,et al.  Contrast discrimination in noise. , 1987, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[13]  D H Brainard,et al.  The Psychophysics Toolbox. , 1997, Spatial vision.

[14]  Shahina Pardhan,et al.  Contrast sensitivity loss with aging: sampling efficiency and equivalent noise at different spatial frequencies. , 2004, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[15]  Lyle J. Graham,et al.  Orientation and Direction Selectivity of Synaptic Inputs in Visual Cortical Neurons A Diversity of Combinations Produces Spike Tuning , 2003, Neuron.

[16]  Nicholas J. Priebe,et al.  The Emergence of Contrast-Invariant Orientation Tuning in Simple Cells of Cat Visual Cortex , 2007, Neuron.

[17]  D. Moore,et al.  Early and rapid perceptual learning , 2004, Nature Neuroscience.

[18]  S. MacDonald,et al.  Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews Review Moment-to-moment Brain Signal Variability: a next Frontier in Human Brain Mapping? , 2022 .

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

[20]  S Makeig,et al.  Blind separation of auditory event-related brain responses into independent components. , 1997, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[21]  Biyu J. He,et al.  Average Is Optimal: An Inverted-U Relationship between Trial-to-Trial Brain Activity and Behavioral Performance , 2013, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[22]  David J. Heeger,et al.  Neural variability: friend or foe? , 2015, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[23]  Stanislas Dehaene,et al.  Cortical activity is more stable when sensory stimuli are consciously perceived , 2015, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[24]  Richard Coppola,et al.  Reduced Variability of Ongoing and Evoked Cortical Activity Leads to Improved Behavioral Performance , 2012, PloS one.

[25]  W. Newsome,et al.  The Variable Discharge of Cortical Neurons: Implications for Connectivity, Computation, and Information Coding , 1998, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[26]  A E Burgess,et al.  Visual signal detection. IV. Observer inconsistency. , 1988, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[27]  Biyu J. He Spontaneous and Task-Evoked Brain Activity Negatively Interact , 2013, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[28]  Klaus Linkenkaer-Hansen,et al.  Dynamics of mu-rhythm suppression caused by median nerve stimulation: a magnetoencephalographic study in human subjects , 2000, Neuroscience Letters.

[29]  Jonathan D. Cohen,et al.  Reproducibility Distinguishes Conscious from Nonconscious Neural Representations , 2010, Science.

[30]  C. Grady,et al.  The modulation of BOLD variability between cognitive states varies by age and processing speed. , 2013, Cerebral cortex.

[31]  D. M. Green,et al.  Signal detection theory and psychophysics , 1966 .

[32]  S. Luck,et al.  The effects of electrode impedance on data quality and statistical significance in ERP recordings. , 2010, Psychophysiology.

[33]  Zoltan Dienes,et al.  Using Bayes to get the most out of non-significant results , 2014, Front. Psychol..

[34]  Douglas D Garrett,et al.  Brain signal variability is parametrically modifiable. , 2014, Cerebral cortex.

[35]  W. Klimesch Alpha-band oscillations, attention, and controlled access to stored information , 2012, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[36]  M. Carandini Amplification of Trial-to-Trial Response Variability by Neurons in Visual Cortex , 2004, PLoS biology.

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

[38]  Christos Constantinidis,et al.  Variability of Prefrontal Neuronal Discharges before and after Training in a Working Memory Task , 2012, PloS one.

[39]  H. Levitt Transformed up-down methods in psychoacoustics. , 1971, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[40]  Peter Neri,et al.  How inherently noisy is human sensory processing? , 2010, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[41]  Emily Buss,et al.  Psychometric functions for pure tone intensity discrimination: slope differences in school-aged children and adults. , 2009, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[42]  John J. Foxe,et al.  The Role of Alpha-Band Brain Oscillations as a Sensory Suppression Mechanism during Selective Attention , 2011, Front. Psychology.

[43]  E. Wagenmakers,et al.  How to quantify the evidence for the absence of a correlation , 2015, Behavior research methods.

[44]  Gert Pfurtscheller,et al.  The cortical activation model (CAM). , 2006, Progress in brain research.

[45]  Jude F. Mitchell,et al.  Differential Attention-Dependent Response Modulation across Cell Classes in Macaque Visual Area V4 , 2007, Neuron.

[46]  Anthony R. McIntosh,et al.  Functional Embedding Predicts the Variability of Neural Activity , 2011, Front. Syst. Neurosci..

[47]  C. Grady,et al.  The Importance of Being Variable , 2011, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[48]  A. Pouget,et al.  Variance as a Signature of Neural Computations during Decision Making , 2011, Neuron.

[49]  A. Stancák,et al.  Desynchronization of cortical rhythms following cutaneous stimulation: effects of stimulus repetition and intensity, and of the size of corpus callosum , 2003, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[50]  A. Grinvald,et al.  Dynamics of Ongoing Activity: Explanation of the Large Variability in Evoked Cortical Responses , 1996, Science.