Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33519390›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in systems neuroscience2020

Lessons From Deep Neural Networks for Studying the Coding Principles of Biological Neural Networks.

Hyojin Bae, Sang Jeong Kim, Chang-Eop Kim

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in systems neuroscience, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Hyojin BaeDepartment of Physiology, Gachon University College of Korean Medicine, Seongnam, South Korea.
Sang Jeong KimLaboratory of Neurophysiology, Department of Physiology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.
Chang-Eop KimDepartment of Physiology, Gachon University College of Korean Medicine, Seongnam, South Korea.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

One of the central goals in systems neuroscience is to understand how information is encoded in the brain, and the standard approach is to identify the relation between a stimulus and a neural response. However, the feature of a stimulus is typically defined by the researcher's hypothesis, which may cause biases in the research conclusion. To demonstrate potential biases, we simulate four likely scenarios using deep neural networks trained on the image classification dataset CIFAR-10 and demonstrate the possibility of selecting suboptimal/irrelevant features or overestimating the network feature representation/noise correlation. Additionally, we present studies investigating neural coding principles in biological neural networks to which our points can be applied. This study aims to not only highlight the importance of careful assumptions and interpretations regarding the neural response to stimulus features but also suggest that the comparative study between deep and biological neural networks from the perspective of machine learning can be an effective strategy for understanding the coding principles of the brain.

Indexed as

biological neural networksdeep neural networksneural codingneural featureshortcut learningsystems neuroscience

Identifiers

PMID33519390
PMCPMC7843526

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.