ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2024
Continuous Bump Attractor Networks Require Explicit Error Coding for Gain Recalibration.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Representations of continuous variables are crucial to create internal models of the external world. A prevailing model of how the brain maintains these representations is given by continuous bump attractor networks (CBANs) in a broad range of brain functions across different areas, such as spatial navigation in hippocampal/entorhinal circuits and working memory in prefrontal cortex. Through recurrent connections, a CBAN maintains a persistent activity bump, whose peak location can vary along a neural space, corresponding to different values of a continuous variable. To track the value of a continuous variable changing over time, a CBAN updates the location of its activity bump based on inputs that encode the changes in the continuous variable (e.g., movement velocity in the case of spatial navigation)-a process akin to mathematical integration. This integration process is not perfect and accumulates error over time. For error correction, CBANs can use additional inputs providing ground-truth information about the continuous variable's correct value (e.g., visual landmarks for spatial navigation). These inputs enable the network dynamics to automatically correct any representation error. Recent experimental work on hippocampal place cells has shown that, beyond correcting errors, ground-truth inputs also fine-tune the gain of the integration process, a crucial factor that links the change in the continuous variable to the updating of the activity bump's location. However, existing CBAN models lack this plasticity, offering no insights into the neural mechanisms and representations involved in the recalibration of the integration gain. In this paper, we explore this gap by using a ring attractor network, a specific type of CBAN, to model the experimental conditions that demonstrated gain recalibration in hippocampal place cells. Our analysis reveals the necessary conditions for neural mechanisms behind gain recalibration within a CBAN. Unlike error correction, which occurs through network dynamics based on ground-truth inputs, gain recalibration requires an additional neural signal that explicitly encodes the error in the network's representation via a rate code. Finally, we propose a modified ring attractor network as an example CBAN model that verifies our theoretical findings. Combining an error-rate code with Hebbian synaptic plasticity, this model achieves recalibration of integration gain in a CBAN, ensuring accurate representation for continuous variables.
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.