IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pcbi00/1003469.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Sign Rule and Beyond: Boundary Effects, Flexibility, and Noise Correlations in Neural Population Codes

Author

Listed:
  • Yu Hu
  • Joel Zylberberg
  • Eric Shea-Brown

Abstract

Over repeat presentations of the same stimulus, sensory neurons show variable responses. This “noise” is typically correlated between pairs of cells, and a question with rich history in neuroscience is how these noise correlations impact the population's ability to encode the stimulus. Here, we consider a very general setting for population coding, investigating how information varies as a function of noise correlations, with all other aspects of the problem – neural tuning curves, etc. – held fixed. This work yields unifying insights into the role of noise correlations. These are summarized in the form of theorems, and illustrated with numerical examples involving neurons with diverse tuning curves. Our main contributions are as follows. (1) We generalize previous results to prove a sign rule (SR) — if noise correlations between pairs of neurons have opposite signs vs. their signal correlations, then coding performance will improve compared to the independent case. This holds for three different metrics of coding performance, and for arbitrary tuning curves and levels of heterogeneity. This generality is true for our other results as well. (2) As also pointed out in the literature, the SR does not provide a necessary condition for good coding. We show that a diverse set of correlation structures can improve coding. Many of these violate the SR, as do experimentally observed correlations. There is structure to this diversity: we prove that the optimal correlation structures must lie on boundaries of the possible set of noise correlations. (3) We provide a novel set of necessary and sufficient conditions, under which the coding performance (in the presence of noise) will be as good as it would be if there were no noise present at all.Author Summary: Sensory systems communicate information to the brain — and brain areas communicate between themselves — via the electrical activities of their respective neurons. These activities are “noisy”: repeat presentations of the same stimulus do not yield to identical responses every time. Furthermore, the neurons' responses are not independent: the variability in their responses is typically correlated from cell to cell. How does this change the impact of the noise — for better or for worse? Our goal here is to classify (broadly) the sorts of noise correlations that are either good or bad for enabling populations of neurons to transmit information. This is helpful as there are many possibilities for the noise correlations, and the set of possibilities becomes large for even modestly sized neural populations. We prove mathematically that, for larger populations, there are many highly diverse ways that favorable correlations can occur. These often differ from the noise correlation structures that are typically identified as beneficial for information transmission – those that follow the so-called “sign rule.” Our results help in interpreting some recent data that seems puzzling from the perspective of this rule.

Suggested Citation

  • Yu Hu & Joel Zylberberg & Eric Shea-Brown, 2014. "The Sign Rule and Beyond: Boundary Effects, Flexibility, and Noise Correlations in Neural Population Codes," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(2), pages 1-22, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1003469
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003469
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003469
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003469&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003469?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jaime de la Rocha & Brent Doiron & Eric Shea-Brown & Krešimir Josić & Alex Reyes, 2007. "Correlation between neural spike trains increases with firing rate," Nature, Nature, vol. 448(7155), pages 802-806, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kaushik J Lakshminarasimhan & Alexandre Pouget & Gregory C DeAngelis & Dora E Angelaki & Xaq Pitkow, 2018. "Inferring decoding strategies for multiple correlated neural populations," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(9), pages 1-40, September.
    2. Stefano Recanatesi & Gabriel Koch Ocker & Michael A Buice & Eric Shea-Brown, 2019. "Dimensionality in recurrent spiking networks: Global trends in activity and local origins in connectivity," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(7), pages 1-29, July.
    3. Volker Pernice & Rava Azeredo da Silveira, 2018. "Interpretation of correlated neural variability from models of feed-forward and recurrent circuits," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(2), pages 1-26, February.
    4. Lluís Hernández-Navarro & Ainhoa Hermoso-Mendizabal & Daniel Duque & Jaime de la Rocha & Alexandre Hyafil, 2021. "Proactive and reactive accumulation-to-bound processes compete during perceptual decisions," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 12(1), pages 1-15, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ashok Litwin-Kumar & Anne-Marie M Oswald & Nathaniel N Urban & Brent Doiron, 2011. "Balanced Synaptic Input Shapes the Correlation between Neural Spike Trains," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(12), pages 1-14, December.
    2. Gaëlle Desbordes & Jianzhong Jin & Chong Weng & Nicholas A Lesica & Garrett B Stanley & Jose-Manuel Alonso, 2008. "Timing Precision in Population Coding of Natural Scenes in the Early Visual System," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(12), pages 1-11, December.
    3. Corentin Massot & Adam D Schneider & Maurice J Chacron & Kathleen E Cullen, 2012. "The Vestibular System Implements a Linear–Nonlinear Transformation In Order to Encode Self-Motion," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(7), pages 1-20, July.
    4. Usman Farooq & George Dragoi, 2024. "Experience of Euclidean geometry sculpts the development and dynamics of rodent hippocampal sequential cell assemblies," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-24, December.
    5. Emiliano Torre & Carlos Canova & Michael Denker & George Gerstein & Moritz Helias & Sonja Grün, 2016. "ASSET: Analysis of Sequences of Synchronous Events in Massively Parallel Spike Trains," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(7), pages 1-34, July.
    6. Volker Pernice & Benjamin Staude & Stefano Cardanobile & Stefan Rotter, 2011. "How Structure Determines Correlations in Neuronal Networks," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(5), pages 1-14, May.
    7. Robert Loshkarev & Dmitry Postnov, 2021. "Toward Minimalistic Model of Cellular Volume Dynamics in Neurovascular Unit," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(19), pages 1-13, September.
    8. Francesco Negro & Dario Farina, 2012. "Factors Influencing the Estimates of Correlation between Motor Unit Activities in Humans," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(9), pages 1-14, September.
    9. Gabriel Koch Ocker & Ashok Litwin-Kumar & Brent Doiron, 2015. "Self-Organization of Microcircuits in Networks of Spiking Neurons with Plastic Synapses," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(8), pages 1-40, August.
    10. Gabriel Koch Ocker & Krešimir Josić & Eric Shea-Brown & Michael A Buice, 2017. "Linking structure and activity in nonlinear spiking networks," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(6), pages 1-47, June.
    11. Geoffrey Terral & Evan Harrell & Gabriel Lepousez & Yohan Wards & Dinghuang Huang & Tiphaine Dolique & Giulio Casali & Antoine Nissant & Pierre-Marie Lledo & Guillaume Ferreira & Giovanni Marsicano & , 2024. "Endogenous cannabinoids in the piriform cortex tune olfactory perception," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-17, December.
    12. Michelle F Craft & Andrea K Barreiro & Shree Hari Gautam & Woodrow L Shew & Cheng Ly, 2021. "Differences in olfactory bulb mitral cell spiking with ortho- and retronasal stimulation revealed by data-driven models," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(9), pages 1-28, September.
    13. Tom Tetzlaff & Moritz Helias & Gaute T Einevoll & Markus Diesmann, 2012. "Decorrelation of Neural-Network Activity by Inhibitory Feedback," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(8), pages 1-29, August.
    14. James Trousdale & Yu Hu & Eric Shea-Brown & Krešimir Josić, 2012. "Impact of Network Structure and Cellular Response on Spike Time Correlations," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(3), pages 1-15, March.
    15. Moritz Helias & Tom Tetzlaff & Markus Diesmann, 2014. "The Correlation Structure of Local Neuronal Networks Intrinsically Results from Recurrent Dynamics," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(1), pages 1-21, January.
    16. Stefano Recanatesi & Gabriel Koch Ocker & Michael A Buice & Eric Shea-Brown, 2019. "Dimensionality in recurrent spiking networks: Global trends in activity and local origins in connectivity," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(7), pages 1-29, July.
    17. Moritz Helias & Moritz Deger & Stefan Rotter & Markus Diesmann, 2010. "Instantaneous Non-Linear Processing by Pulse-Coupled Threshold Units," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(9), pages 1-10, September.
    18. Volker Pernice & Rava Azeredo da Silveira, 2018. "Interpretation of correlated neural variability from models of feed-forward and recurrent circuits," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(2), pages 1-26, February.
    19. Andrea K Barreiro & Cheng Ly, 2017. "When do correlations increase with firing rates in recurrent networks?," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(4), pages 1-30, April.
    20. Christian Donner & Klaus Obermayer & Hideaki Shimazaki, 2017. "Approximate Inference for Time-Varying Interactions and Macroscopic Dynamics of Neural Populations," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(1), pages 1-27, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1003469. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ploscompbiol (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.