ArticlePLoS computational biology2025
Relating sparse and predictive coding to divisive normalization.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Sparse coding, predictive coding and divisive normalization have each been found to be principles that underlie the function of neural circuits in many parts of the brain, supported by substantial experimental evidence. However, the connections between these related principles are still poorly understood. Sparse coding and predictive coding can be reconciled into a learning framework with predictive structure and sparse responses, termed as sparse/predictive coding. However, how sparse/predictive coding (a learning model) is connected with divisive normalization (not a learning model) is still not well investigated. In this paper, we show how sparse coding, predictive coding, and divisive normalization can be described within a unified framework, and illustrate this explicitly within the context of a two-layer neural learning model of sparse/predictive coding. This two-layer model is constructed in a way that implements sparse coding with a network structure that is constructed by implementing predictive coding. We demonstrate how a homeostatic function that regulates neural responses in the model can shape the nonlinearity of neural responses in a way that replicates different forms of divisive normalization. Simulations show that the model can learn simple cells in the primary visual cortex with the property of contrast saturation, which has previously been explained by divisive normalization. In summary, the study demonstrates that the three principles of sparse coding, predictive coding, and divisive normalization can be connected to provide a learning framework based on biophysical properties, such as Hebbian learning and homeostasis, and this framework incorporates both learning and more diverse response nonlinearities observed experimentally. This framework has the potential to also be used to explain how the brain learns to integrate input from different sensory modalities.
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.