ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2020
Robust parallel decision-making in neural circuits with nonlinear inhibition.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Noise correlations and neuronal diversity may limit the utility of winner-take-all readout in a pop out visual search task.PLoS computational biology · 2025Article
- A multi-stage anticipated surprise model with dynamic expectation for economic decision-making.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Revealing and reshaping attractor dynamics in large networks of cortical neurons.PLoS computational biology · 2024Article
- Article
- Attractor and integrator networks in the brain.Nature reviews. Neuroscience · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
An elemental computation in the brain is to identify the best in a set of options and report its value. It is required for inference, decision-making, optimization, action selection, consensus, and foraging. Neural computing is considered powerful because of its parallelism; however, it is unclear whether neurons can perform this max-finding operation in a way that improves upon the prohibitively slow optimal serial max-finding computation (which takes [Formula: see text] time for N noisy candidate options) by a factor of N, the benchmark for parallel computation. Biologically plausible architectures for this task are winner-take-all (WTA) networks, where individual neurons inhibit each other so only those with the largest input remain active. We show that conventional WTA networks fail the parallelism benchmark and, worse, in the presence of noise, altogether fail to produce a winner when N is large. We introduce the nWTA network, in which neurons are equipped with a second nonlinearity that prevents weakly active neurons from contributing inhibition. Without parameter fine-tuning or rescaling as N varies, the nWTA network achieves the parallelism benchmark. The network reproduces experimentally observed phenomena like Hick's law without needing an additional readout stage or adaptive N-dependent thresholds. Our work bridges scales by linking cellular nonlinearities to circuit-level decision-making, establishes that distributed computation saturating the parallelism benchmark is possible in networks of noisy, finite-memory neurons, and shows that Hick's law may be a symptom of near-optimal parallel decision-making with noisy input.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.