Flexible categorization in perceptual decision making

Perceptual decisions require the brain to make categorical choices based on accumulated sensory evidence. The underlying computations have been studied using either phenomenological drift diffusion models or neurobiological network models exhibiting winner-take-all attractor dynamics. Although both classes of models can account for a large body of experimental data, it remains unclear to what extent their dynamics are qualitatively equivalent. Here we show that, unlike the drift diffusion model, the attractor model can operate in different integration regimes: an increase in the stimulus fluctuations or the stimulus duration promotes transitions between decision-states leading to a crossover between weighting mostly early evidence (primacy regime) to weighting late evidence (recency regime). Between these two limiting cases, we found a novel regime, which we name flexible categorization, in which fluctuations are strong enough to reverse initial categorizations, but only if they are incorrect. This asymmetry in the reversing probability results in a non-monotonic psychometric curve, a novel and distinctive feature of the attractor model. Finally, we show psychophysical evidence for the crossover between integration regimes predicted by the attractor model and for the relevance of this new regime. Our findings point to correcting transitions as an important yet overlooked feature of perceptual decision making.

[1]  Bingni W. Brunton,et al.  Rats and Humans Can Optimally Accumulate Evidence for Decision-Making , 2013, Science.

[2]  Anders Ledberg,et al.  Neurobiological Models of Two-Choice Decision Making Can Be Reduced to a One-Dimensional Nonlinear Diffusion Equation , 2008, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[3]  Kiyosi Itô,et al.  Essentials of Stochastic Processes , 2006 .

[4]  L. Maloney,et al.  The Irrationality of Categorical Perception , 2013, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[5]  Xiao-Jing Wang,et al.  Cortico–basal ganglia circuit mechanism for a decision threshold in reaction time tasks , 2006, Nature Neuroscience.

[6]  Timothy D. Hanks,et al.  Bounded Integration in Parietal Cortex Underlies Decisions Even When Viewing Duration Is Dictated by the Environment , 2008, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[7]  Philip Holmes,et al.  Optimality and Robustness of a Biophysical Decision-Making Model under Norepinephrine Modulation , 2009, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[8]  R. Ratcliff,et al.  Sequential Sampling Models in Cognitive Neuroscience: Advantages, Applications, and Extensions. , 2016, Annual review of psychology.

[9]  David J. C. MacKay,et al.  Information Theory, Inference, and Learning Algorithms , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory.

[10]  Paul Miller,et al.  Accuracy and response-time distributions for decision-making: linear perfect integrators versus nonlinear attractor-based neural circuits , 2013, Journal of Computational Neuroscience.

[11]  Xiao-Jing Wang,et al.  Engagement of Pulvino-cortical Feedforward and Feedback Pathways in Cognitive Computations , 2018, Neuron.

[12]  Michael N. Shadlen,et al.  Differentiating between integration and non-integration strategies in perceptual decision making , 2020, bioRxiv.

[13]  H. Kramers Brownian motion in a field of force and the diffusion model of chemical reactions , 1940 .

[14]  Gregoire Nicolis,et al.  Stochastic resonance , 2007, Scholarpedia.

[15]  Roozbeh Kiani,et al.  Integration of Direction Cues Is Invariant to the Temporal Gap between Them , 2013, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[16]  Jonathan D. Cohen,et al.  The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Do Humans Produce the Speed–accuracy Trade-off That Maximizes Reward Rate? , 2022 .

[17]  Jose L Pardo-Vazquez,et al.  The mechanistic foundation of Weber’s law , 2019, Nature Neuroscience.

[18]  Onyekachi Odoemene,et al.  Visual Evidence Accumulation Guides Decision-Making in Unrestrained Mice , 2017, Journal of Neuroscience.

[19]  S. Bestmann,et al.  Response repetition biases in human perceptual decisions are explained by activity decay in competitive attractor models , 2016, eLife.

[20]  Verónica Nácher,et al.  Neural correlates of a postponed decision report , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[21]  Ariel Zylberberg,et al.  The construction of confidence in a perceptual decision , 2012, Front. Integr. Neurosci..

[22]  David J. Freedman,et al.  Choice-correlated activity fluctuations underlie learning of neuronal category representation , 2015, Nature Communications.

[23]  B. Cumming,et al.  Decision-related activity in sensory neurons reflects more than a neuron’s causal effect , 2009, Nature.

[24]  D. Wolpert,et al.  A common mechanism underlies changes of mind about decisions and confidence , 2015, eLife.

[25]  Robert C. Wilson,et al.  Regulation of evidence accumulation by pupil-linked arousal processes , 2018, Nature Human Behaviour.

[26]  Samuel W Cheadle,et al.  Adaptive Gain Control during Human Perceptual Choice , 2014, Neuron.

[27]  Felix A. Wichmann,et al.  Rapid animal detection in natural scenes: Critical features are local , 2010 .

[28]  J. Townsend,et al.  Decision field theory: a dynamic-cognitive approach to decision making in an uncertain environment. , 1993, Psychological review.

[29]  Marius Usher,et al.  Non-monotonic Temporal-Weighting Indicates a Dynamically Modulated Evidence-Integration Mechanism , 2016, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[30]  E. Miller,et al.  A Neural Circuit Model of Flexible Sensorimotor Mapping: Learning and Forgetting on Multiple Timescales , 2007, Neuron.

[31]  Christopher Summerfield,et al.  Neural Mechanisms of Human Perceptual Choice Under Focused and Divided Attention , 2015, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[32]  M. Shadlen,et al.  A role for neural integrators in perceptual decision making. , 2003, Cerebral cortex.

[33]  J. Gold,et al.  The neural basis of decision making. , 2007, Annual review of neuroscience.

[34]  Jonathan D. Cohen,et al.  The physics of optimal decision making: a formal analysis of models of performance in two-alternative forced-choice tasks. , 2006, Psychological review.

[35]  Il Memming Park,et al.  Functional dissection of signal and noise in MT and LIP during decision-making , 2017, Nature Neuroscience.

[36]  Roger Ratcliff,et al.  A Theory of Memory Retrieval. , 1978 .

[37]  A. Compte,et al.  Bump attractor dynamics in prefrontal cortex explains behavioral precision in spatial working memory , 2014, Nature Neuroscience.

[38]  D. Levi,et al.  Receptive versus perceptive fields from the reverse-correlation viewpoint , 2006, Vision Research.

[39]  Roger Ratcliff,et al.  Internal and External Sources of Variability in Perceptual Decision-Making , 2017, Psychological review.

[40]  Larissa Albantakis,et al.  Changes of Mind in an Attractor Network of Decision-Making , 2011, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[41]  M. Shadlen,et al.  The effect of stimulus strength on the speed and accuracy of a perceptual decision. , 2005, Journal of vision.

[42]  K. Vahala Handbook of stochastic methods for physics, chemistry and the natural sciences , 1986, IEEE Journal of Quantum Electronics.

[43]  J Overbaugh,et al.  Lymphokines modulate the growth and survival of thymic tumor cells containing a novel feline leukemia virus/Notch2 variant. , 1999, Veterinary immunology and immunopathology.

[44]  P. Goldman-Rakic,et al.  Synaptic mechanisms and network dynamics underlying spatial working memory in a cortical network model. , 2000, Cerebral cortex.

[45]  M. Shadlen,et al.  Neural Activity in Macaque Parietal Cortex Reflects Temporal Integration of Visual Motion Signals during Perceptual Decision Making , 2005, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[46]  Xiao-Jing Wang,et al.  Probabilistic Decision Making by Slow Reverberation in Cortical Circuits , 2002, Neuron.

[47]  D. Wolpert,et al.  Changing your mind: a computational mechanism of vacillation , 2009, Nature.

[48]  Gustavo Deco,et al.  Stochastic dynamics as a principle of brain function , 2009, Progress in Neurobiology.

[49]  Richard D. Lange,et al.  A confirmation bias in perceptual decision-making due to hierarchical approximate inference , 2018, bioRxiv.

[50]  Anne E. Urai,et al.  Choice History Biases Subsequent Evidence Accumulation , 2018, bioRxiv.

[51]  Bingni W. Brunton,et al.  Distinct relationships of parietal and prefrontal cortices to evidence accumulation , 2014, Nature.

[52]  Marius Usher,et al.  Using Time-Varying Evidence to Test Models of Decision Dynamics: Bounded Diffusion vs. the Leaky Competing Accumulator Model , 2012, Front. Neurosci..

[53]  Stephen I. Ryu,et al.  Decoding and perturbing decision states in real time , 2019, Nature.

[54]  Rafal Bogacz,et al.  A comparison of bounded diffusion models for choice in time controlled tasks. , 2009, Journal of mathematical psychology.

[55]  P. Miller,et al.  Stochastic Transitions between Neural States in Taste Processing and Decision-Making , 2010, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[56]  Xiao-Jing Wang,et al.  A Recurrent Network Mechanism of Time Integration in Perceptual Decisions , 2006, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[57]  M. Shadlen,et al.  Choice Certainty Is Informed by Both Evidence and Decision Time , 2014, Neuron.

[58]  Robert C. Wilson,et al.  A divisive model of evidence accumulation explains uneven weighting of evidence over time , 2019, bioRxiv.

[59]  Ralf M Haefner,et al.  Differentiating between Models of Perceptual Decision Making Using Pupil Size Inferred Confidence , 2018, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[60]  Reza Ebrahimpour,et al.  Sequence-dependent sensitivity explains the accuracy of decisions when cues are separated with a gap , 2018, Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics.

[61]  Christopher J. Cueva,et al.  Dynamics of Neural Population Responses in Prefrontal Cortex Indicate Changes of Mind on Single Trials , 2014, Current Biology.

[62]  Sandro Romani,et al.  Discrete attractor dynamics underlies persistent activity in the frontal cortex , 2019, Nature.

[63]  Erin L. Rich,et al.  Decoding subjective decisions from orbitofrontal cortex , 2016, Nature Neuroscience.