Computational principles of neural adaptation for binaural signal integration

Adaptation to statistics of sensory inputs is an essential ability of neural systems and extends their effective operational range. Having a broad operational range facilitates to react to sensory inputs of different granularities, thus is a crucial factor for survival. The computation of auditory cues for spatial localization of sound sources, particularly the interaural level difference (ILD), has long been considered as a static process. Novel findings suggest that this process of ipsi- and contra-lateral signal integration is highly adaptive and depends strongly on recent stimulus statistics. Here, adaptation aids the encoding of auditory perceptual space of various granularities. To investigate the mechanism of auditory adaptation in binaural signal integration in detail, we developed a neural model architecture for simulating functions of lateral superior olive (LSO) and medial nucleus of the trapezoid body (MNTB) composed of single compartment conductance-based neurons. Neurons in the MNTB serve as an intermediate relay population. Their signal is integrated by the LSO population on a circuit level to represent excitatory and inhibitory interactions of input signals. The circuit incorporates an adaptation mechanism operating at the synaptic level based on local inhibitory feedback signals. The model’s predictive power is demonstrated in various simulations replicating physiological data. Incorporating the innovative adaptation mechanism facilitates a shift in neural responses towards the most effective stimulus range based on recent stimulus history. The model demonstrates that a single LSO neuron quickly adapts to these stimulus statistics and, thus, can encode an extended range of ILDs in the ipsilateral hemisphere. Most significantly, we provide a unique measurement of the adaptation efficacy of LSO neurons. Prerequisite of normal function is an accurate interaction of inhibitory and excitatory signals, a precise encoding of time and a well-tuned local feedback circuit. We suggest that the mechanisms of temporal competitive-cooperative interaction and the local feedback mechanism jointly sensitize the circuit to enable a response shift towards contra-lateral and ipsi-lateral stimuli, respectively. Author summary Why are we more precise in localizing a sound after hearing it several times? Adaptation to the statistics of a stimulus plays a crucial role in this. The present article investigates the abilities of a neural adaptation mechanism for improved localization skills based on a neural network model. Adaptation to stimulus statistics is very prominent in sensory systems of animals and allows them to respond to a wide range of stimuli, thus is a crucial factor for survival. For example, humans are able to navigate under suddenly changing illumination conditions (driving a car into and out of a tunnel). This is possible by courtesy of adaptation abilities of our sensory organs and pathways. Certainly, adaptation is not confined to a single sense like vision but also affects other senses like audition. Especially the perception of sound source location. Compared to vision, the localization of a sound source in the horizontal plane is a rather complicated task since the location cannot be read out from the receptor surface but needs to be computed. This requires the underlying neural system to calculate differences of the intensity between the two ears which provide a distinct cue for the location of a sound source. Here, adaptation to this cue allows to focus on a specific part of auditory space and thereby facilitates improved localisation abilities. Based on recent findings that suggest that the intensity difference computation is a flexible process with distinct adaptation mechanisms, we developed a neural model that computes the intensity difference to two incoming sound signals. The model comprises a novel mechanism for adaptation to sound source locations and provides a means to investigate underlying neural principles of adaptation and compare their effectivenesses. We demonstrate that due this mechanism the perceptual range is extended and a finer resolution of auditory space is obtained. Results explain the neural basis for adaptation and indicate that the interplay between different adaptation mechanisms facilitate highly precise sound source localization in a wide range of locations.

[1]  L. Rayleigh,et al.  XII. On our perception of sound direction , 1907 .

[2]  L A JEFFRESS,et al.  A place theory of sound localization. , 1948, Journal of comparative and physiological psychology.

[3]  E. C. Cherry Some Experiments on the Recognition of Speech, with One and with Two Ears , 1953 .

[4]  J. Boudreau,et al.  Binaural interaction in the cat superior olive S segment. , 1967, Journal of neurophysiology.

[5]  J. Guinan,et al.  Single auditory units in the superior olivary complex , 1972 .

[6]  B. Sakitt Indices of Discriminability , 1973, Nature.

[7]  Stephen Grossberg,et al.  Contour Enhancement, Short Term Memory, and Constancies in Reverberating Neural Networks , 1973 .

[8]  S. Grossberg Contour Enhancement , Short Term Memory , and Constancies in Reverberating Neural Networks , 1973 .

[9]  E. Knudsen The Hearing of the Barn Owl , 1981 .

[10]  R. Shapley The Contrast Gain Control and Feedback Within the Retina , 1982 .

[11]  M. Reed,et al.  A model for the computation and encoding of azimuthal information by the lateral superior olive. , 1990, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[12]  C. Koch,et al.  Visibility of synaptically induced conductance changes: theory and simulations of anatomically characterized cortical pyramidal cells , 1990, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[13]  D. H. Johnson,et al.  Excitatory/inhibitory interaction in the LSO revealed by point process modeling , 1992, Hearing Research.

[14]  T. Yin,et al.  Envelope coding in the lateral superior olive. I. Sensitivity to interaural time differences. , 1995, Journal of neurophysiology.

[15]  Paul Antoine Salin,et al.  Distinct short-term plasticity at two excitatory synapses in the hippocampus. , 1996, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[16]  B. Grothe,et al.  Neural Delays Shape Selectivity to Interaural Intensity Differences in the Lateral Superior Olive , 1996, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[17]  P. Joris Envelope coding in the lateral superior olive. II. Characteristic delays and comparison with responses in the medial superior olive. , 1996, Journal of neurophysiology.

[18]  P. Monsivais,et al.  Processing of interaural intensity differences in the LSO: role of interaural threshold differences. , 1997, Journal of neurophysiology.

[19]  T. Yin,et al.  Anatomy and physiology of principal cells of the medial nucleus of the trapezoid body (MNTB) of the cat. , 1998, Journal of neurophysiology.

[20]  Christof Koch,et al.  Biophysics of Computation: Information Processing in Single Neurons (Computational Neuroscience Series) , 1998 .

[21]  M Zacksenhouse,et al.  Single-neuron modeling of LSO unit responses. , 1998, Journal of neurophysiology.

[22]  T. Yin,et al.  Envelope coding in the lateral superior olive. III. Comparison with afferent pathways. , 1998, Journal of neurophysiology.

[23]  E. Todorov,et al.  A local circuit approach to understanding integration of long-range inputs in primary visual cortex. , 1998, Cerebral cortex.

[24]  B. Wilson,et al.  Cochlear Implants: Principles & Practices , 2000 .

[25]  R. Shapley,et al.  A neuronal network model of macaque primary visual cortex (V1): orientation selectivity and dynamics in the input layer 4Calpha. , 2000, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[26]  Tom C. T. Yin,et al.  Neural Mechanisms of Encoding Binaural Localization Cues in the Auditory Brainstem , 2002 .

[27]  W. Regehr,et al.  Short-term synaptic plasticity. , 2002, Annual review of physiology.

[28]  T. Yin,et al.  The Coding of Spatial Location by Single Units in the Lateral Superior Olive of the Cat. II. The Determinants of Spatial Receptive Fields in Azimuth , 2002, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[29]  B. Grothe,et al.  Precise inhibition is essential for microsecond interaural time difference coding , 2002, Nature.

[30]  E. Süli,et al.  An introduction to numerical analysis , 2003 .

[31]  R. Klinke,et al.  Processing of binaural stimuli by cat superior olivary complex neurons , 2004, Experimental Brain Research.

[32]  B. Grothe,et al.  Time can be traded for intensity in the lower auditory system , 1995, Naturwissenschaften.

[33]  I. Dean,et al.  Neural population coding of sound level adapts to stimulus statistics , 2005, Nature Neuroscience.

[34]  B. Grothe,et al.  Dynamic changes in level influence spatial coding in the lateral superior olive , 2008, Hearing Research.

[35]  K. Koka,et al.  Interaural Level Difference Discrimination Thresholds for Single Neurons in the Lateral Superior Olive , 2008, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[36]  A. Magnusson,et al.  Retrograde GABA Signaling Adjusts Sound Localization by Balancing Excitation and Inhibition in the Brainstem , 2008, Neuron.

[37]  B. Grothe,et al.  Interaural Time Difference Processing in the Mammalian Medial Superior Olive: The Role of Glycinergic Inhibition , 2008, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[38]  Paul V. Watkins,et al.  Specialized neuronal adaptation for preserving input sensitivity , 2008, Nature Neuroscience.

[39]  Bo Wen,et al.  A Silicon Cochlea With Active Coupling , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Circuits and Systems.

[40]  B. Delgutte,et al.  Dynamic Range Adaptation to Sound Level Statistics in the Auditory Nerve , 2009, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[41]  B. Grothe,et al.  Mechanisms of sound localization in mammals. , 2010, Physiological reviews.

[42]  Johannes C. Dahmen,et al.  Adaptation to Stimulus Statistics in the Perception and Neural Representation of Auditory Space , 2010, Neuron.

[43]  Konrad P. Kording,et al.  Sensory Adaptation and Short Term Plasticity as Bayesian Correction for a Changing Brain , 2010, PloS one.

[44]  Johannes C. Dahmen,et al.  Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews Neural Circuits Underlying Adaptation and Learning in the Perception of Auditory Space , 2022 .

[45]  M. Andermann,et al.  Short-term plasticity as a neural mechanism supporting memory and attentional functions , 2011, Brain Research.

[46]  D. Irvine,et al.  An Improved Model for the Rate–Level Functions of Auditory-Nerve Fibers , 2011, The Journal of Neuroscience.

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

[48]  S. Morad,et al.  Ceramide-orchestrated signalling in cancer cells , 2012, Nature Reviews Cancer.

[49]  B. Grothe,et al.  Adaptation in sound localization: from GABAB receptor–mediated synaptic modulation to perception , 2013, Nature Neuroscience.

[50]  Tobias Brosch,et al.  Computing with a Canonical Neural Circuits Model with Pool Normalization and Modulating Feedback , 2014, Neural Computation.

[51]  Johannes C. Dahmen,et al.  Complementary adaptive processes contribute to the developmental plasticity of spatial hearing , 2014, Nature Neuroscience.

[52]  Kim-Anh Lê Cao,et al.  mixOmics: An R package for ‘omics feature selection and multiple data integration , 2017, bioRxiv.

[53]  Jutta Kretzberg,et al.  Physiological models of the lateral superior olive , 2017, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[54]  C. Leibold,et al.  A novel concept for dynamic adjustment of auditory space , 2018, Scientific Reports.

[55]  B. Grothe,et al.  Cooperative population coding facilitates efficient sound-source separability by adaptation to input statistics , 2019, PLoS biology.

[56]  M. Ernst,et al.  Time-intensity trading experiment Park et al. 1996. , 2020 .