ArticleFrontiers in computational neuroscience2026
Attention maps reveal stimulus-dependent retinal population codes.
Article in Frontiers in computational neuroscience, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Understanding how deep learning models map neural population activity to stimuli requires both high predictive accuracy and interpretable internal mechanisms. Methods: In this work, we employ the POYO framework, a scalable transformer architecture based on spike tokenization and latent modeling, to decode large-scale retinal ganglion cell recordings. We ask whether the model's attention mechanisms can provide biologically meaningful insight by evaluating two contrasting conditions: a uniform flash stimulus and a spatiotemporally structured moving ball stimulus. Results: We show that the model decodes both stimuli reliably and adapts rapidly to new preparations via fine-tuning, suggesting the capture of transferable population codes. We then analyze the model's internal organization, revealing that encoder attention patterns adapt to stimulus complexity: attention heads appear synchronized and broadly distributed for the flash stimulus, whereas they exhibit heterogeneous, specialized allocation strategies for the moving ball. By aggregating attention weights to identify the most relevant neurons for each task, we demonstrate that these high-attention units possess distinct physiological signatures-concentrating sustained, high-firing rates responses for the flash vs. diverse kinetics for the structured input. We confirm the causal validity of these findings via attention-guided ablations, where the progressive removal of these top-ranked units yields systematic losses in decoding performance. Furthermore, we expand the analysis to the decoder's attention, uncovering stimulus-specific retrieval strategies where individual heads exhibit distinct directional tuning preferences. Discussion: We conclude that generic attention mechanisms can spontaneously recover biological coding strategies, identifying functionally distinct neural subpopulations without supervision, thus validating the utility of transformer-based architectures for neuroscientific discovery.
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.