1
|
Novicky F, Parr T, Friston K, Mirza MB, Sajid N. Bistable perception, precision and neuromodulation. Cereb Cortex 2024; 34:bhad401. [PMID: 37950879 PMCID: PMC10793076 DOI: 10.1093/cercor/bhad401] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/19/2022] [Revised: 10/04/2023] [Accepted: 10/05/2023] [Indexed: 11/13/2023] Open
Abstract
Bistable perception follows from observing a static, ambiguous, (visual) stimulus with two possible interpretations. Here, we present an active (Bayesian) inference account of bistable perception and posit that perceptual transitions between different interpretations (i.e. inferences) of the same stimulus ensue from specific eye movements that shift the focus to a different visual feature. Formally, these inferences are a consequence of precision control that determines how confident beliefs are and change the frequency with which one can perceive-and alternate between-two distinct percepts. We hypothesized that there are multiple, but distinct, ways in which precision modulation can interact to give rise to a similar frequency of bistable perception. We validated this using numerical simulations of the Necker cube paradigm and demonstrate the multiple routes that underwrite the frequency of perceptual alternation. Our results provide an (enactive) computational account of the intricate precision balance underwriting bistable perception. Importantly, these precision parameters can be considered the computational homologs of particular neurotransmitters-i.e. acetylcholine, noradrenaline, dopamine-that have been previously implicated in controlling bistable perception, providing a computational link between the neurochemistry and perception.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Filip Novicky
- Department of Neurophysics, Radboud University, Heyendaalseweg 135, 6525 AJ, Nijmegen, Netherlands
- Faculty of Psychology and Neuroscience, Maastricht University, Universiteitssingel 406229 ER, Maastricht, Netherlands
| | - Thomas Parr
- Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging, UCL, 12 Queen Square London WC1N 3AR, United Kingdom
| | - Karl Friston
- Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging, UCL, 12 Queen Square London WC1N 3AR, United Kingdom
| | - Muammer Berk Mirza
- Department of Psychology, University of Cambridge, Downing Pl, Cambridge CB2 3EB, United Kingdom
| | - Noor Sajid
- Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging, UCL, 12 Queen Square London WC1N 3AR, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Friston K. The many faces of action: Comment on "An active inference model of hierarchical action understanding, learning and imitation" by Proietti, Pezzulo, and Tessari. Phys Life Rev 2023; 46:125-128. [PMID: 37379731 DOI: 10.1016/j.plrev.2023.06.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/15/2023] [Accepted: 06/16/2023] [Indexed: 06/30/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Karl Friston
- The Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, WC1N 3AR, London, UK; VERSES AI Research Lab, Los Angeles, CA 90016, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Seghier ML, Price CJ. Interpreting and validating complexity and causality in lesion-symptom prognoses. Brain Commun 2023; 5:fcad178. [PMID: 37346231 PMCID: PMC10279811 DOI: 10.1093/braincomms/fcad178] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/13/2023] [Revised: 05/08/2023] [Accepted: 06/04/2023] [Indexed: 06/23/2023] Open
Abstract
This paper considers the steps needed to generate pragmatic and interpretable lesion-symptom mappings that can be used for clinically reliable prognoses. The novel contributions are 3-fold. We first define and inter-relate five neurobiological and five methodological constraints that need to be accounted for when interpreting lesion-symptom associations and generating synthetic lesion data. The first implication is that, because of these constraints, lesion-symptom mapping needs to focus on probabilistic relationships between Lesion and Symptom, with Lesion as a multivariate spatial pattern, Symptom as a time-dependent behavioural profile and evidence that Lesion raises the probability of Symptom. The second implication is that in order to assess the strength of probabilistic causality, we need to distinguish between causal lesion sites, incidental lesion sites, spared but dysfunctional sites and intact sites, all of which might affect the accuracy of the predictions and prognoses generated. We then formulate lesion-symptom mappings in logical notations, including combinatorial rules, that are then used to evaluate and better understand complex brain-behaviour relationships. The logical and theoretical framework presented applies to any type of neurological disorder but is primarily discussed in relationship to stroke damage. Accommodating the identified constraints, we discuss how the 1965 Bradford Hill criteria for inferring probabilistic causality, post hoc, from observed correlations in epidemiology-can be applied to lesion-symptom mapping in stroke survivors. Finally, we propose that rather than rely on post hoc evaluation of how well the causality criteria have been met, the neurobiological and methodological constraints should be addressed, a priori, by changing the experimental design of lesion-symptom mappings and setting up an open platform to share and validate the discovery of reliable and accurate lesion rules that are clinically useful.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mohamed L Seghier
- Correspondence to: Mohamed Seghier Department of Biomedical Engineering Khalifa University of Science and Technology PO BOX: 127788, Abu Dhabi, UAE E-mail:
| | - Cathy J Price
- Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Floegel M, Kasper J, Perrier P, Kell CA. How the conception of control influences our understanding of actions. Nat Rev Neurosci 2023; 24:313-329. [PMID: 36997716 DOI: 10.1038/s41583-023-00691-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 02/28/2023] [Indexed: 04/01/2023]
Abstract
Wilful movement requires neural control. Commonly, neural computations are thought to generate motor commands that bring the musculoskeletal system - that is, the plant - from its current physical state into a desired physical state. The current state can be estimated from past motor commands and from sensory information. Modelling movement on the basis of this concept of plant control strives to explain behaviour by identifying the computational principles for control signals that can reproduce the observed features of movements. From an alternative perspective, movements emerge in a dynamically coupled agent-environment system from the pursuit of subjective perceptual goals. Modelling movement on the basis of this concept of perceptual control aims to identify the controlled percepts and their coupling rules that can give rise to the observed characteristics of behaviour. In this Perspective, we discuss a broad spectrum of approaches to modelling human motor control and their notions of control signals, internal models, handling of sensory feedback delays and learning. We focus on the influence that the plant control and the perceptual control perspective may have on decisions when modelling empirical data, which may in turn shape our understanding of actions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mareike Floegel
- Department of Neurology and Brain Imaging Center, Goethe University Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - Johannes Kasper
- Department of Neurology and Brain Imaging Center, Goethe University Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - Pascal Perrier
- Univ. Grenoble Alpes, CNRS, Grenoble INP, GIPSA-lab, Grenoble, France
| | - Christian A Kell
- Department of Neurology and Brain Imaging Center, Goethe University Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Abstract
This review considers computational psychiatry from a particular viewpoint: namely, a commitment to explaining psychopathology in terms of pathophysiology. It rests on the notion of a generative model as underwriting (i) sentient processing in the brain, and (ii) the scientific process in psychiatry. The story starts with a view of the brain-from cognitive and computational neuroscience-as an organ of inference and prediction. This offers a formal description of neuronal message passing, distributed processing and belief propagation in neuronal networks; and how certain kinds of dysconnection lead to aberrant belief updating and false inference. The dysconnections in question can be read as a pernicious synaptopathy that fits comfortably with formal notions of how we-or our brains-encode uncertainty or its complement, precision. It then considers how the ensuing process theories are tested empirically, with an emphasis on the computational modelling of neuronal circuits and synaptic gain control that mediates attentional set, active inference, learning and planning. The opportunities afforded by this sort of modelling are considered in light of in silico experiments; namely, computational neuropsychology, computational phenotyping and the promises of a computational nosology for psychiatry. The resulting survey of computational approaches is not scholarly or exhaustive. Rather, its aim is to review a theoretical narrative that is emerging across subdisciplines within psychiatry and empirical scales of investigation. These range from epilepsy research to neurodegenerative disorders; from post-traumatic stress disorder to the management of chronic pain, from schizophrenia to functional medical symptoms.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Karl Friston
- Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging, Institute of Neurology, University College London, London, WC1N 3AR, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Da Costa L, Lanillos P, Sajid N, Friston K, Khan S. How Active Inference Could Help Revolutionise Robotics. Entropy 2022; 24:361. [PMID: 35327872 PMCID: PMC8946999 DOI: 10.3390/e24030361] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/21/2022] [Revised: 02/24/2022] [Accepted: 02/28/2022] [Indexed: 02/05/2023]
Abstract
Recent advances in neuroscience have characterised brain function using mathematical formalisms and first principles that may be usefully applied elsewhere. In this paper, we explain how active inference—a well-known description of sentient behaviour from neuroscience—can be exploited in robotics. In short, active inference leverages the processes thought to underwrite human behaviour to build effective autonomous systems. These systems show state-of-the-art performance in several robotics settings; we highlight these and explain how this framework may be used to advance robotics.
Collapse
|
7
|
Abstract
The active visual system comprises the visual cortices, cerebral attention networks, and oculomotor system. While fascinating in its own right, it is also an important model for sensorimotor networks in general. A prominent approach to studying this system is active inference-which assumes the brain makes use of an internal (generative) model to predict proprioceptive and visual input. This approach treats action as ensuring sensations conform to predictions (i.e., by moving the eyes) and posits that visual percepts are the consequence of updating predictions to conform to sensations. Under active inference, the challenge is to identify the form of the generative model that makes these predictions-and thus directs behavior. In this paper, we provide an overview of the generative models that the brain must employ to engage in active vision. This means specifying the processes that explain retinal cell activity and proprioceptive information from oculomotor muscle fibers. In addition to the mechanics of the eyes and retina, these processes include our choices about where to move our eyes. These decisions rest upon beliefs about salient locations, or the potential for information gain and belief-updating. A key theme of this paper is the relationship between "looking" and "seeing" under the brain's implicit generative model of the visual world.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thomas Parr
- Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging, Queen Square Institute of Neurology, London, United Kingdom
| | - Noor Sajid
- Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging, Queen Square Institute of Neurology, London, United Kingdom
| | - Lancelot Da Costa
- Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging, Queen Square Institute of Neurology, London, United Kingdom
- Department of Mathematics, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - M. Berk Mirza
- Department of Neuroimaging, Centre for Neuroimaging Sciences, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Karl J. Friston
- Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging, Queen Square Institute of Neurology, London, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Abstract
Functional recovery after brain damage varies widely and depends on many factors, including lesion site and extent. When a neuronal system is damaged, recovery may occur by engaging residual (e.g., perilesional) components. When damage is extensive, recovery depends on the availability of other intact neural structures that can reproduce the same functional output (i.e., degeneracy). A system's response to damage may occur rapidly, require learning or both. Here, we simulate functional recovery from four different types of lesions, using a generative model of word repetition that comprised a default premorbid system and a less used alternative system. The synthetic lesions (i) completely disengaged the premorbid system, leaving the alternative system intact, (ii) partially damaged both premorbid and alternative systems, and (iii) limited the experience-dependent plasticity of both. The results, across 1000 trials, demonstrate that (i) a complete disconnection of the premorbid system naturally invoked the engagement of the other, (ii) incomplete damage to both systems had a much more devastating long-term effect on model performance and (iii) the effect of reducing learning capacity within each system. These findings contribute to formal frameworks for interpreting the effect of different types of lesions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Noor Sajid
- Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging, University College London, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, 12 Queen Square, London, WC1N 3AR, UK.
| | - Emma Holmes
- Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging, University College London, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, 12 Queen Square, London, WC1N 3AR, UK
| | - Thomas M Hope
- Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging, University College London, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, 12 Queen Square, London, WC1N 3AR, UK
| | - Zafeirios Fountas
- Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging, University College London, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, 12 Queen Square, London, WC1N 3AR, UK
- Huawei 2012 Laboratories, London, UK
| | - Cathy J Price
- Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging, University College London, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, 12 Queen Square, London, WC1N 3AR, UK
| | - Karl J Friston
- Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging, University College London, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, 12 Queen Square, London, WC1N 3AR, UK
| |
Collapse
|