An Efficient Coding Hypothesis Links Sparsity and Selectivity of Neural Responses

To what extent are sensory responses in the brain compatible with first-order principles? The efficient coding hypothesis projects that neurons use as few spikes as possible to faithfully represent natural stimuli. However, many sparsely firing neurons in higher brain areas seem to violate this hypothesis in that they respond more to familiar stimuli than to nonfamiliar stimuli. We reconcile this discrepancy by showing that efficient sensory responses give rise to stimulus selectivity that depends on the stimulus-independent firing threshold and the balance between excitatory and inhibitory inputs. We construct a cost function that enforces minimal firing rates in model neurons by linearly punishing suprathreshold synaptic currents. By contrast, subthreshold currents are punished quadratically, which allows us to optimally reconstruct sensory inputs from elicited responses. We train synaptic currents on many renditions of a particular bird's own song (BOS) and few renditions of conspecific birds' songs (CONs). During training, model neurons develop a response selectivity with complex dependence on the firing threshold. At low thresholds, they fire densely and prefer CON and the reverse BOS (REV) over BOS. However, at high thresholds or when hyperpolarized, they fire sparsely and prefer BOS over REV and over CON. Based on this selectivity reversal, our model suggests that preference for a highly familiar stimulus corresponds to a high-threshold or strong-inhibition regime of an efficient coding strategy. Our findings apply to songbird mirror neurons, and in general, they suggest that the brain may be endowed with simple mechanisms to rapidly change selectivity of neural responses to focus sensory processing on either familiar or nonfamiliar stimuli. In summary, we find support for the efficient coding hypothesis and provide new insights into the interplay between the sparsity and selectivity of neural responses.

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

[2]  F. Nottebohm,et al.  Connections of vocal control nuclei in the canary telencephalon , 1982, The Journal of comparative neurology.

[3]  D. Margoliash Acoustic parameters underlying the responses of song-specific neurons in the white-crowned sparrow , 1983, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[4]  Jae S. Lim,et al.  Signal estimation from modified short-time Fourier transform , 1983, ICASSP.

[5]  D Margoliash,et al.  Preference for autogenous song by auditory neurons in a song system nucleus of the white-crowned sparrow , 1986, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[6]  D. Fitzpatrick,et al.  Patterns of excitation and inhibition evoked by horizontal connections in visual cortex share a common relationship to orientation columns , 1995, Neuron.

[7]  Terrence J. Sejnowski,et al.  Blind separation and blind deconvolution: an information-theoretic approach , 1995, 1995 International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing.

[8]  David J. Field,et al.  Emergence of simple-cell receptive field properties by learning a sparse code for natural images , 1996, Nature.

[9]  G. E. Vates,et al.  Auditory pathways of caudal telencephalon and their relation to the song system of adult male zebra finches (Taenopygia guttata) , 1996, The Journal of comparative neurology.

[10]  M S Lewicki,et al.  Hierarchical Organization of Auditory Temporal Context Sensitivity , 1996, Journal of Neuroscience.

[11]  D. Chakrabarti,et al.  A fast fixed - point algorithm for independent component analysis , 1997 .

[12]  G. Bi,et al.  Synaptic Modifications in Cultured Hippocampal Neurons: Dependence on Spike Timing, Synaptic Strength, and Postsynaptic Cell Type , 1998, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[13]  H. Sebastian Seung,et al.  Learning the parts of objects by non-negative matrix factorization , 1999, Nature.

[14]  Aapo Hyvärinen,et al.  Fast and robust fixed-point algorithms for independent component analysis , 1999, IEEE Trans. Neural Networks.

[15]  R. Mooney Different Subthreshold Mechanisms Underlie Song Selectivity in Identified HVc Neurons of the Zebra Finch , 2000, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[16]  K. Sen,et al.  Spectral-temporal Receptive Fields of Nonlinear Auditory Neurons Obtained Using Natural Sounds , 2022 .

[17]  Erkki Oja,et al.  Independent component analysis: algorithms and applications , 2000, Neural Networks.

[18]  Michael S. Brainard,et al.  Auditory feedback in learning and maintenance of vocal behaviour , 2000, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[19]  K. Sen,et al.  Feature analysis of natural sounds in the songbird auditory forebrain. , 2001, Journal of neurophysiology.

[20]  C. Gilbert,et al.  Learning to see: experience and attention in primary visual cortex , 2001, Nature Neuroscience.

[21]  Patrik O. Hoyer,et al.  Non-negative sparse coding , 2002, Proceedings of the 12th IEEE Workshop on Neural Networks for Signal Processing.

[22]  S. Hochstein,et al.  View from the Top Hierarchies and Reverse Hierarchies in the Visual System , 2002, Neuron.

[23]  Glenn C. Turner,et al.  Oscillations and Sparsening of Odor Representations in the Mushroom Body , 2002, Science.

[24]  Gilles Laurent,et al.  Olfactory network dynamics and the coding of multidimensional signals , 2002, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[25]  Mark D. Plumbley Algorithms for Non-Negative Independent Component Analysis , 2002 .

[26]  Mark D. Plumbley Algorithms for nonnegative independent component analysis , 2003, IEEE Trans. Neural Networks.

[27]  R. Mooney,et al.  Inhibitory and Excitatory Mechanisms Underlying Auditory Responses to Learned Vocalizations in the Songbird Nucleus HVC , 2003, Neuron.

[28]  D. Margoliash,et al.  Neuronal populations and single cells representing learned auditory objects , 2003, Nature.

[29]  N. C. Singh,et al.  Selectivity for conspecific song in the zebra finch auditory forebrain. , 2003, Journal of neurophysiology.

[30]  F. Theunissen,et al.  Neural response to bird’s own song and tutor song in the zebra finch field L and caudal mesopallium , 2004, Journal of Comparative Physiology A.

[31]  Bruno A Olshausen,et al.  Sparse coding of sensory inputs , 2004, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[32]  Frédéric E Theunissen,et al.  Song Selectivity in the Song System and in the Auditory Forebrain , 2004, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[33]  G. Laurent,et al.  Intrinsic and Circuit Properties Favor Coincidence Detection for Decoding Oscillatory Input , 2004, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[34]  R. Mooney,et al.  Synaptic Transformations Underlying Highly Selective Auditory Representations of Learned Birdsong , 2004, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[35]  C. Koch,et al.  Invariant visual representation by single neurons in the human brain , 2005, Nature.

[36]  Masakazu Konishi,et al.  Neural auditory selectivity develops in parallel with song. , 2005, Journal of neurobiology.

[37]  Michael S. Lewicki,et al.  Efficient auditory coding , 2006, Nature.

[38]  C. Koch,et al.  Sparse Representation in the Human Medial Temporal Lobe , 2006, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[39]  W. Bialek,et al.  Neural Decision Boundaries for Maximal Information Transmission , 2007, PLoS ONE.

[40]  Joseph K Jun,et al.  Development of Neural Circuitry for Precise Temporal Sequences through Spontaneous Activity, Axon Remodeling, and Synaptic Plasticity , 2007, PloS one.

[41]  Frédéric E Theunissen,et al.  Development of selectivity for natural sounds in the songbird auditory forebrain. , 2007, Journal of neurophysiology.

[42]  M. Brainard,et al.  Performance variability enables adaptive plasticity of ‘crystallized’ adult birdsong , 2007, Nature.

[43]  Lawrence C Katz,et al.  Sparse and Selective Odor Coding by Mitral/Tufted Neurons in the Main Olfactory Bulb , 2007, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[44]  M. Dresselhaus,et al.  A Specialized Forebrain Circuit for Vocal Babbling in the Juvenile Songbird , 2008 .

[45]  T. Hromádka,et al.  Sparse Representation of Sounds in the Unanesthetized Auditory Cortex , 2008, PLoS biology.

[46]  Jonathan F Prather,et al.  A Synaptic Basis for Auditory–Vocal Integration in the Songbird , 2008, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[47]  Ilan Lampl,et al.  Shift in the Balance between Excitation and Inhibition during Sensory Adaptation of S1 Neurons , 2008, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[48]  Katherine I. Nagel,et al.  Organizing Principles of Spectro-Temporal Encoding in the Avian Primary Auditory Area Field L , 2008, Neuron.

[49]  J. F. Prather,et al.  Precise auditory–vocal mirroring in neurons for learned vocal communication , 2008, Nature.

[50]  H. Barlow,et al.  Single Units and Sensation: A Neuron Doctrine for Perceptual Psychology? , 1972, Perception.

[51]  Conor J. Houghton,et al.  Sparse coding of birdsong and receptive field structure in songbirds , 2009, Network.

[52]  Frédéric E Theunissen,et al.  Functional Groups in the Avian Auditory System , 2009, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[53]  Michale S Fee,et al.  A basal ganglia-forebrain circuit in the songbird biases motor output to avoid vocal errors , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[54]  P. Fossier,et al.  Serotoninergic fine-tuning of the excitation-inhibition balance in rat visual cortical networks. , 2010, Cerebral cortex.

[55]  F. Theunissen,et al.  Role of the zebra finch auditory thalamus in generating complex representations for natural sounds. , 2010, Journal of neurophysiology.

[56]  Sarah M. N. Woolley,et al.  Developmental experience alters information coding in auditory midbrain and forebrain neurons , 2010, Developmental neurobiology.

[57]  Shih-Chii Liu,et al.  Perceptron learning rule derived from spike-frequency adaptation and spike-time-dependent plasticity , 2010, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[58]  Richard Hans Robert Hahnloser,et al.  Spike-Time-Dependent Plasticity and Heterosynaptic Competition Organize Networks to Produce Long Scale-Free Sequences of Neural Activity , 2010, Neuron.