Evidence for a hierarchy of predictions and prediction errors in human cortex

According to hierarchical predictive coding models, the cortex constantly generates predictions of incoming stimuli at multiple levels of processing. Responses to auditory mismatches and omissions are interpreted as reflecting the prediction error when these predictions are violated. An alternative interpretation, however, is that neurons passively adapt to repeated stimuli. We separated these alternative interpretations by designing a hierarchical auditory novelty paradigm and recording human EEG and magnetoencephalographic (MEG) responses to mismatching or omitted stimuli. In the crucial condition, participants listened to frequent series of four identical tones followed by a fifth different tone, which generates a mismatch response. Because this response itself is frequent and expected, the hierarchical predictive coding hypothesis suggests that it should be cancelled out by a higher-order prediction. Three consequences ensue. First, the mismatch response should be larger when it is unexpected than when it is expected. Second, a perfectly monotonic sequence of five identical tones should now elicit a higher-order novelty response. Third, omitting the fifth tone should reveal the brain's hierarchical predictions. The rationale here is that, when a deviant tone is expected, its omission represents a violation of two expectations: a local prediction of a tone plus a hierarchically higher expectation of its deviancy. Thus, such an omission should induce a greater prediction error than when a standard tone is expected. Simultaneous EEE- magnetoencephalographic recordings verify those predictions and thus strongly support the predictive coding hypothesis. Higher-order predictions appear to be generated in multiple areas of frontal and associative cortices.

[1]  R. Näätänen,et al.  Early selective-attention effect on evoked potential reinterpreted. , 1978, Acta psychologica.

[2]  D. Cohen,et al.  Demonstration of useful differences between magnetoencephalogram and electroencephalogram. , 1983, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[3]  J. Mäkelä,et al.  Human auditory cortex is activated by omissions of auditory stimuli , 1997, Brain Research.

[4]  H. Yabe,et al.  Temporal window of integration revealed by MMN to sound omission , 1997, Neuroreport.

[5]  N. Cowan,et al.  Two cognitive systems simultaneously prepared for opposite events. , 1999, Psychophysiology.

[6]  Rajesh P. N. Rao,et al.  Predictive coding in the visual cortex: a functional interpretation of some extra-classical receptive-field effects. , 1999 .

[7]  N Kraus,et al.  Neural representation of consciously imperceptible speech sound differences , 2000, Perception & psychophysics.

[8]  T. M. Darcey,et al.  Responses of Human Auditory Association Cortex to the Omission of an Expected Acoustic Event , 2001, NeuroImage.

[9]  M. Sabri,et al.  Effects of sequential and temporal probability of deviant occurrence on mismatch negativity. , 2001, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[10]  J Horváth,et al.  Simultaneously active pre-attentive representations of local and global rules for sound sequences in the human brain. , 2001, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[11]  I. Winkler,et al.  Event-related brain potentials reveal multiple stages in the perceptual organization of sound. , 2005, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[12]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  A theory of cortical responses , 2005, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[13]  S. Dehaene,et al.  Timing of the brain events underlying access to consciousness during the attentional blink , 2005, Nature Neuroscience.

[14]  I. Winkler Interpreting the Mismatch Negativity , 2007 .

[15]  S. Dehaene,et al.  Brain Dynamics Underlying the Nonlinear Threshold for Access to Consciousness , 2007, PLoS biology.

[16]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Evoked brain responses are generated by feedback loops , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[17]  Jim M. Monti,et al.  Neural repetition suppression reflects fulfilled perceptual expectations , 2008, Nature Neuroscience.

[18]  Michael J. Constantino,et al.  Neural repetition suppression reflects fulfilled perceptual expectations , 2008 .

[19]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  A Hierarchy of Time-Scales and the Brain , 2008, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[20]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  The functional anatomy of the MMN: A DCM study of the roving paradigm , 2008, NeuroImage.

[21]  Oliver Gruber,et al.  Top-down and bottom-up modulation of brain structures involved in auditory discrimination , 2009, Brain Research.

[22]  I. Winkler,et al.  I Heard That Coming: Event-Related Potential Evidence for Stimulus-Driven Prediction in the Auditory System , 2009, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[23]  S. Dehaene,et al.  Neural signature of the conscious processing of auditory regularities , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[24]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  The mismatch negativity: A review of underlying mechanisms , 2009, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[25]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Recognizing Sequences of Sequences , 2009, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[26]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Dynamic Causal Modeling of the Response to Frequency Deviants , 2009, Journal of neurophysiology.

[27]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  A Dual Role for Prediction Error in Associative Learning , 2008, Cerebral cortex.

[28]  Stanislas Dehaene,et al.  Probing the lifetimes of auditory novelty detection processes , 2010, Neuropsychologia.

[29]  H. Tiitinen,et al.  Mismatch negativity (MMN), the deviance-elicited auditory deflection, explained. , 2010, Psychophysiology.

[30]  F. Barceló,et al.  Why are auditory novels distracting? Contrasting the roles of novelty, violation of expectation and stimulus change , 2011, Cognition.

[31]  S. Dehaene,et al.  Probing consciousness with event-related potentials in the vegetative state , 2011, Neurology.

[32]  E. Maris,et al.  Prior Expectation Mediates Neural Adaptation to Repeated Sounds in the Auditory Cortex: An MEG Study , 2011, The Journal of Neuroscience.