Analytical Results for the Error in Filtering of Gaussian Processes

Bayesian filtering of stochastic stimuli has received a great deal of attention recently. It has been applied to describe the way in which biological systems dynamically represent and make decisions about the environment. There have been no exact results for the error in the biologically plausible setting of inference on point process, however. We present an exact analysis of the evolution of the mean-squared error in a state estimation task using Gaussian-tuned point processes as sensors. This allows us to study the dynamics of the error of an optimal Bayesian decoder, providing insights into the limits obtainable in this task. This is done for Markovian and a class of non-Markovian Gaussian processes. We find that there is an optimal tuning width for which the error is minimized. This leads to a characterization of the optimal encoding for the setting as a function of the statistics of the stimulus, providing a mathematically sound primer for an ecological theory of sensory processing.

[1]  M. Pettet,et al.  Dynamic changes in receptive-field size in cat primary visual cortex. , 1992, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[2]  J. Elgin.  The Fokker-Planck Equation: Methods of Solution and Applications , 1984 .

[3]  Peter Dayan,et al.  Fast Population Coding , 2007, Neural Computation.

[4]  M. Meister,et al.  Dynamic predictive coding by the retina , 2005, Nature.

[5]  Jean-Pascal Pfister,et al.  Know Thy Neighbour: A Normative Theory of Synaptic Depression , 2009, NIPS.

[6]  Joseph J Atick,et al.  Could information theory provide an ecological theory of sensory processing? , 2011, Network.

[7]  I. Dean,et al.  Rapid Neural Adaptation to Sound Level Statistics , 2008, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[8]  Yonina C. Eldar,et al.  A neural network implementing optimal state estimation based on dynamic spike train decoding , 2007, NIPS.

[9]  Ron Meir,et al.  Error-Based Analysis of Optimal Tuning Functions Explains Phenomena Observed in Sensory Neurons , 2010, Front. Comput. Neurosci..

[10]  Tetsuya J Kobayashi,et al.  Implementation of dynamic Bayesian decision making by intracellular kinetics. , 2010, Physical review letters.

[11]  Dörthe Malzahn,et al.  A statistical physics approach for the analysis of machine learning algorithms on real data , 2005 .

[12]  Matthias Bethge,et al.  Optimal Short-Term Population Coding: When Fisher Information Fails , 2002, Neural Computation.

[13]  M. Sur,et al.  Adaptation-Induced Plasticity of Orientation Tuning in Adult Visual Cortex , 2000, Neuron.

[14]  C. Gardiner.  Stochastic Methods: A Handbook for the Natural and Social Sciences , 2009 .

[15]  H. Risken.  The Fokker-Planck equation : methods of solution and applications , 1985 .

[16]  Carl E. Rasmussen,et al.  Gaussian processes for machine learning , 2005, Adaptive computation and machine learning.

[17]  Alexander S. Ecker,et al.  Reassessing optimal neural population codes with neurometric functions , 2011, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[18]  Peter Sollich,et al.  Learning Curves for Gaussian Process Regression: Approximations and Bounds , 2001, Neural Computation.

[19]  William Bialek,et al.  Adaptive Rescaling Maximizes Information Transmission , 2000, Neuron.