ArticlePLoS computational biology2024
Encoding surprise by retinal ganglion cells.
Article in PLoS computational 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The efficient coding hypothesis posits that early sensory neurons transmit maximal information about sensory stimuli, given internal constraints. A central prediction of this theory is that neurons should preferentially encode stimuli that are most surprising. Previous studies suggest this may be the case in early visual areas, where many neurons respond strongly to rare or surprising stimuli. For example, previous research showed that when presented with a rhythmic sequence of full-field flashes, many retinal ganglion cells (RGCs) respond strongly at the instance the flash sequence stops, and when another flash would be expected. This phenomenon is called the 'omitted stimulus response'. However, it is not known whether the responses of these cells varies in a graded way depending on the level of stimulus surprise. To investigate this, we presented retinal neurons with extended sequences of stochastic flashes. With this stimulus, the surprise associated with a particular flash/silence, could be quantified analytically, and varied in a graded manner depending on the previous sequences of flashes and silences. Interestingly, we found that RGC responses could be well explained by a simple normative model, which described how they optimally combined their prior expectations and recent stimulus history, so as to encode surprise. Further, much of the diversity in RGC responses could be explained by the model, due to the different prior expectations that different neurons had about the stimulus statistics. These results suggest that even as early as the retina many cells encode surprise, relative to their own, internally generated expectations.
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.