ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2024
Sampling bias corrections for accurate neural measures of redundant, unique, and synergistic information.
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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Shannon Information theory has long been a tool of choice to measure empirically how populations of neurons in the brain encode information about cognitive variables. Recently, Partial Information Decomposition (PID) has emerged as principled way to break down this information into components identifying not only the unique information carried by each neuron, but also whether relationships between neurons generate synergistic or redundant information. While it has been long recognized that Shannon information measures on neural activity suffer from a (mostly upward) limited sampling estimation bias, this issue has largely been ignored in the burgeoning field of PID analysis of neural activity. We used simulations to investigate the limited sampling bias of PID computed from discrete probabilities (suited to describe neural spiking activity). We found that PID suffers from a large bias that is uneven across components, with synergy by far the most biased. Using approximate analytical expansions, we found that the bias of synergy increases quadratically with the number of discrete responses of each neuron, whereas the bias of unique and redundant information increase only linearly or sub-linearly. Based on the understanding of the PID bias properties, we developed simple yet effective procedures that correct for the bias effectively, and that improve greatly the PID estimation with respect to current state-of-the-art procedures. We apply these PID bias correction procedures to datasets of 53117 pairs neurons in auditory cortex, posterior parietal cortex and hippocampus of mice performing cognitive tasks, deriving precise estimates and bounds of how synergy and redundancy vary across these brain regions.
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.