Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Search
2000 character limit reached

Source Invariance and Probabilistic Transfer: A Testable Theory of Probabilistic Neural Representations

Published 11 Apr 2024 in q-bio.NC | (2404.08101v1)

Abstract: As animals interact with their environments, they must infer properties of their surroundings. Some animals, including humans, can represent uncertainty about those properties. But when, if ever, do they use probability distributions to represent their uncertainty? It depends on which definition we choose. In this paper, we argue that existing definitions are inadequate because they are untestable. We then propose our own definition. There are two reasons why existing definitions are untestable. First, they do not distinguish between representations of uncertainty and representations of variables merely related to uncertainty ('representational indeterminacy'). Second, they do not distinguish between probabilistic representations of uncertainty and merely "heuristic" representations of uncertainty. We call this 'model indeterminacy' because the underlying problem is that we do not have access to the animal's generative model. We define probabilistic representations by two properties: 1) they encode uncertainty regardless of the source of the uncertainty ('source invariance'), 2) they support the efficient learning of new tasks that would be more difficult to learn given non-probabilistic representations ('probabilistic task transfer'). Source invariance indicates that they are representations of uncertainty rather than variables merely related to uncertainty, thereby solving representational indeterminacy. Probabilistic task transfer indicates that they are probabilistic representations of uncertainty rather than merely heuristic representations, thereby solving model indeterminacy.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (126)
  1. Ando, T. (2010). Bayesian model selection and statisti modeling. CRC Press.
  2. Different types of uncertainty in multisensory perceptual decision making. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 378(1886):20220349. Publisher: Royal Society.
  3. Knowing how much you don’t know: a neural organization of uncertainty estimates. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 13(8):572–586.
  4. The calibration and resolution of confidence in perceptual judgments. Perception & psychophysics, 55(4):412–428. Place: United States.
  5. Barlow, H. B. (1961). Possible principles underlying the transformation of sensory messages. Sensory communication, 1(01).
  6. Marginalization in Neural Circuits with Divisive Normalization. The Journal of Neuroscience, 31(43):15310.
  7. Not Noisy, Just Wrong: The Role of Suboptimal Inference in Behavioral Variability. Neuron, 74(1):30–39.
  8. Berger, J. O. (2013). Statistical decision theory and Bayesian analysis. Springer Science & Business Media.
  9. Binmore, K. (2008). Rational decisions. Princeton University Press.
  10. Where are multisensory signals combined for perceptual decision-making? Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 40:31–37.
  11. Block, N. (1988). Functional Role and Truth Conditions. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 88(1):157–181. Publisher: Wiley-Blackwell.
  12. Block, N. (2023). The Border Between Seeing and Thinking. OUP Usa, New York, US.
  13. On the Opportunities and Risks of Foundation Models. arXiv:2108.07258 [cs].
  14. A characterization of the neural representation of confidence during probabilistic learning. NeuroImage, 268:119849.
  15. Bayesian just-so stories in psychology and neuroscience. Psychological bulletin, 138(3):389–414. Place: United States.
  16. Environmental dynamics shape perceptual decision bias. PLoS Computational Biology, 19(6):e1011104. Publisher: Public Library of Science San Francisco, CA USA.
  17. The probabilistic mind: Prospects for Bayesian cognitive science. Oxford University Press, USA.
  18. Chen, Z. (2013). An overview of bayesian methods for neural spike train analysis. Computational Intelligence and Neuroscience, 2013:1:1.
  19. Clark, A. (2013). Whatever next? Predictive brains, situated agents, and the future of cognitive science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 36(3):181–204. Publisher: Cambridge University Press.
  20. Cox, R. T. (1946). Probability, Frequency and Reasonable Expectation. American Journal of Physics, 14(1):1–13.
  21. Efficient computation and cue integration with noisy population codes. Nature Neuroscience, 4(8):826–831. Number: 8 Publisher: Nature Publishing Group.
  22. A Survey of Vision-Language Pre-Trained Models. arXiv:2202.10936 [cs].
  23. Cortical-like dynamics in recurrent circuits optimized for sampling-based probabilistic inference. Nature Neuroscience, 23(9):1138–1149.
  24. Humans integrate visual and haptic information in a statistically optimal fashion. Nature, 415(6870):429–433.
  25. Feldman, J. (2015). Bayesian models of perceptual organization. Handbook of perceptual organization, pages 1008–1026. Publisher: Oxford University Press Oxford.
  26. Neural correlates of reliability-based cue weighting during multisensory integration. Nature Neuroscience, 15(1):146–154.
  27. Statistically optimal perception and learning: from behavior to neural representations. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 14(3):119–130.
  28. Friston, K. (2005). A theory of cortical responses. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 360(1456):815–836. _eprint: https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/pdf/10.1098/rstb.2005.1622.
  29. Friston, K. (2012). The history of the future of the Bayesian brain. NeuroImage, 62(2):1230–1233.
  30. Geisler, W. S. (2003). Ideal observer analysis. The visual neurosciences, 10(7):12–12.
  31. Bayesian natural selection and the evolution of perceptual systems. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 357(1420):419–448. _eprint: https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/pdf/10.1098/rstb.2001.1055.
  32. Neural representations of confidence emerge from the process of decision formation during perceptual choices. NeuroImage, 106:134–143.
  33. From Variational to Deterministic Autoencoders. arXiv:1903.12436 [cs, stat].
  34. Gigerenzer, G. (2008). Why Heuristics Work. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3(1):20–29. _eprint: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6916.2008.00058.x.
  35. The representation of visual salience in monkey parietal cortex. Nature, 391(6666):481–484.
  36. Gregory, R. L. (1973). Eye and brain: The psychology of seeing. Publisher: McGraw-Hill.
  37. Probabilistic models of cognition: exploring representations and inductive biases. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 14(8):357–364.
  38. Neural correlates of multisensory cue integration in macaque MSTd. Nature Neuroscience, 11(10):1201–1210. Number: 10 Publisher: Nature Publishing Group.
  39. On Calibration of Modern Neural Networks. In Precup, D. and Teh, Y. W., editors, Proceedings of the 34th International Conference on Machine Learning, volume 70 of Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, pages 1321–1330. PMLR.
  40. Deep Neural Networks Reveal a Gradient in the Complexity of Neural Representations across the Ventral Stream. The Journal of Neuroscience, 35(27):10005.
  41. Halpern, J. Y. (1999). Cox’s Theorem Revisited. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 11:429–435.
  42. Harman, G. (1982). Conceptual Role Semantics. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, 28(April):242–56. Publisher: Academic Press.
  43. Harman, G. (1987). (Nonsolipsistic) Conceptual Role Semantics. In LePore, E., editor, New Directions in Semantics, pages 55–81. Academic Press.
  44. Neuroscience-Inspired Artificial Intelligence. Neuron, 95(2):245–258.
  45. Helmholtz, H. v. (1924). Treatise on physiological optics, 3 vols. Publisher: Optical Society of America.
  46. Ridge Regression: Biased Estimation for Nonorthogonal Problems. Technometrics, 12(1):55–67. Publisher: Taylor & Francis _eprint: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/00401706.1970.10488634.
  47. Representation of visual uncertainty through neural gain variability. Nature Communications, 11(1):2513.
  48. Testing the Bayesian model of perceived speed. Vision Research, 42(19):2253–2257.
  49. Optimal representation of sensory information by neural populations. Nature Neuroscience, 9(5):690–696. Number: 5 Publisher: Nature Publishing Group.
  50. Temporal context calibrates interval timing. Nature Neuroscience, 13(8):1020–1026. Number: 8 Publisher: Nature Publishing Group.
  51. Bayesian Fundamentalism or Enlightenment? On the explanatory status and theoretical contributions of Bayesian models of cognition. The Behavioral and brain sciences, 34(4):169–188; disuccsion 188–231. Place: England.
  52. Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk. Econometrica, 47(2):263–291. Publisher: [Wiley, Econometric Society].
  53. Neural correlates, computation and behavioural impact of decision confidence. Nature, 455(7210):227–231. Publisher: Nature Publishing Group.
  54. Deep Supervised, but Not Unsupervised, Models May Explain IT Cortical Representation. PLOS Computational Biology, 10(11):1–29. Publisher: Public Library of Science.
  55. Choice Certainty Is Informed by Both Evidence and Decision Time. Neuron, 84(6):1329–1342.
  56. Representation of Confidence Associated with a Decision by Neurons in the Parietal Cortex. Science, 324(5928):759–764. _eprint: https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/science.1169405.
  57. Auto-Encoding Variational Bayes. arXiv. arXiv:1312.6114 [cs, stat].
  58. Bayesian transfer in a complex spatial localization task. Journal of Vision, 20(6):17.
  59. The Bayesian brain: the role of uncertainty in neural coding and computation. Trends in Neurosciences, 27(12):712–719.
  60. Representations of uncertainty: where art thou? Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 38:150–162.
  61. Kolmogorov, A. (1933). Sulla determinazione empirica di una lgge di distribuzione. Inst. Ital. Attuari, Giorn., 4:83–91.
  62. Bayesian Encoding and Decoding as Distinct Perspectives on Neural Coding. bioRxiv, page 2020.10.14.339770.
  63. Representing Probability in Perception and Experience. Review of Philosophy and Psychology, 13(4):907–945. Publisher: Springer.
  64. Hierarchical Bayesian inference in the visual cortex. JOSA A, 20(7):1434–1448. Publisher: Optica Publishing Group.
  65. Ma, W. J. (2012). Organizing probabilistic models of perception. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 16(10):511–518.
  66. Bayesian inference with probabilistic population codes. Nature Neuroscience, 9(11):1432–1438.
  67. Neural coding of uncertainty and probability. Annual review of neuroscience, 37(1):205–220.
  68. Mach, E. (1897). Contributions to the Analysis of the Sensations. Open court publishing Company.
  69. Natural and Artificial Intelligence: A brief introduction to the interplay between AI and neuroscience research. Neural Networks, 144:603–613.
  70. Overestimation of base-rate differences in complex perceptual categories. Perception & Psychophysics, 60(4):575–592.
  71. Bayesian decision theory as a model of human visual perception: Testing Bayesian transfer. Visual neuroscience, 26(1):147–155. Publisher: Cambridge University Press.
  72. How Robust Are Probabilistic Models of Higher-Level Cognition? Psychological Science, 24(12):2351–2360. Publisher: SAGE Publications Inc.
  73. A Bayesian foundation for individual learning under uncertainty. Frontiers in human neuroscience, 5:39. Publisher: Frontiers Research Foundation.
  74. Bayesian sampling in visual perception. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108(30):12491–12496. Publisher: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
  75. Morrison, J. (2023). Third-Personal Evidence for Perceptual Confidence. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research.
  76. The ‘Ideal Homunculus’: decoding neural population signals. Trends in Neurosciences, 21(6):259–265.
  77. Neural Variability and Sampling-Based Probabilistic Representations in the Visual Cortex. Neuron, 92(2):530–543.
  78. Efficient probabilistic inference in generic neural networks trained with non-probabilistic feedback. Nature Communications, 8(1):138.
  79. Orlandi, N. (2014). The Innocent Eye: Why Vision is Not a Cognitive Process. Oxford University PRess.
  80. How can a Bayesian approach inform neuroscience? European Journal of Neuroscience, 35(7):1169–1179. _eprint: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1460-9568.2012.08010.x.
  81. Perceptual confidence neglects decision-incongruent evidence in the brain. Nature Human Behaviour, 1(7):1–8. Publisher: Nature Publishing Group.
  82. Probabilistic brains: knowns and unknowns. Nature Neuroscience, 16(9):1170–1178. Number: 9 Publisher: Nature Publishing Group.
  83. Introspective judgments predict the precision and likelihood of successful maintenance of visual working memory. Journal of Vision, 12(13):21.
  84. Rahnev, D. (2017). The case against full probability distributions in perceptual decision making. bioRxiv, page 108944. Publisher: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Section: New Results.
  85. Is Perception Probabilistic?
  86. Suboptimality in perceptual decision making. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 41:e223. Publisher: Cambridge University Press.
  87. Ramsey, F. P. (1926). Truth and Probability. Histoy of Economic Thought Chapters, pages 156–198. Publisher: McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought.
  88. Rao, R. P. (2004). Bayesian computation in recurrent neural circuits. Neural computation, 16(1):1–38. Publisher: MIT Press One Rogers Street, Cambridge, MA 02142-1209, USA journals-info ….
  89. Predictive coding in the visual cortex: a functional interpretation of some extra-classical receptive-field effects. Nature Neuroscience, 2(1):79–87.
  90. Generating Diverse High-Fidelity Images with VQ-VAE-2. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, volume 32. Curran Associates, Inc.
  91. Stochastic Backpropagation and Approximate Inference in Deep Generative Models. In Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 1278–1286. PMLR. ISSN: 1938-7228.
  92. Doubly distributional population codes: simultaneous representation of uncertainty and multiplicity. Neural computation, 15(10):2255–2279. Place: United States.
  93. The sampling brain. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 21(7):492–493. Place: Netherlands Publisher: Elsevier Science.
  94. Signatures of a Statistical Computation in the Human Sense of Confidence. Neuron, 90(3):499–506.
  95. Linear Inversion of Band-Limited Reflection Seismograms. SIAM Journal on Scientific and Statistical Computing, 7(4):1307–1330. Publisher: Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics.
  96. How much to trust the senses: Likelihood learning. Journal of Vision, 14(13):13–13. Publisher: The Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology.
  97. Models and processes of multisensory cue combination. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 25:38–46.
  98. Shea, N. (2014). Neural Signaling of Probabilistic Vectors. Philosophy of Science, 81(5):902–913.
  99. A probabilistic population code based on neural samples. In Bengio, S., Wallach, H., Larochelle, H., Grauman, K., Cesa-Bianchi, N., and Garnett, R., editors, Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, volume 31. Curran Associates, Inc.
  100. Smith, A. M. (2001). Alhacen’s Theory of Visual Perception: A Critical Edition, with English Translation and Commentary, of the First Three Books of Alhacen’s ”De aspectibus”, the Medieval Latin Version of Ibn al-Haytham’s ”Kitab al-Manazir”: Volume One. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, 91(4):i–337. Publisher: American Philosophical Society.
  101. Bayesian Computation through Cortical Latent Dynamics. Neuron, 103(5):934–947.e5.
  102. Noise characteristics and prior expectations in human visual speed perception. Nature Neuroscience, 9(4):578–585. Number: 4 Publisher: Nature Publishing Group.
  103. Theory-based Bayesian models of inductive learning and reasoning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10(7):309–318.
  104. Tibshirani, R. (1996). Regression Shrinkage and Selection via the Lasso. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Methodological), 58(1):267–288. Publisher: [Royal Statistical Society, Wiley].
  105. Optimal compensation for changes in task-relevant movement variability. The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience, 25(31):7169–7178.
  106. Statistical decision theory and the selection of rapid, goal-directed movements. J. Opt. Soc. Am. A, 20(7):1419–1433. Publisher: OSA.
  107. Meta-learning synaptic plasticity and memory addressing for continual familiarity detection. Neuron, 110(3):544–557.e8.
  108. A Brief Review of Deep Multi-task Learning and Auxiliary Task Learning. arXiv:2007.01126 [cs, stat].
  109. Sensory uncertainty decoded from visual cortex predicts behavior. Nature Neuroscience, 18(12):1728–1730.
  110. Differential representations of prior and likelihood uncertainty in the human brain. Current Biology, 22(18):1641–1648. Publisher: Elsevier.
  111. Bayesian models: the structure of the world, uncertainty, behavior, and the brain. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1224(1):22–39. Publisher: Wiley Online Library.
  112. Vineberg, S. (2016). Dutch Book Arguments. In Zalta, E. N., editor, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, spring 2016 edition.
  113. Flexible and accurate inference and learning for deep generative models. In Bengio, S., Wallach, H., Larochelle, H., Grauman, K., Cesa-Bianchi, N., and Garnett, R., editors, Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, volume 31. Curran Associates, Inc.
  114. Scale Mixtures of Gaussians and the Statistics of Natural Images. In Solla, S., Leen, T., and Müller, K., editors, Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, volume 12. MIT Press.
  115. Wald, A. (1947). An Essentially Complete Class of Admissible Decision Functions. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 18(4):549 – 555. Publisher: Institute of Mathematical Statistics.
  116. A neural basis of probabilistic computation in visual cortex. Nature Neuroscience, 23(1):122–129.
  117. Studying the neural representations of uncertainty. arXiv:2202.04324 [q-bio].
  118. Wang, J. X. (2021). Meta-learning in natural and artificial intelligence. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 38:90–95.
  119. Implicit knowledge of visual uncertainty guides decisions with asymmetric outcomes. Journal of Vision, 8(3):2–2.
  120. Performance-optimized hierarchical models predict neural responses in higher visual cortex. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(23):8619.
  121. Probabilistic reasoning by neurons. Nature, 447(7148):1075–1080. Publisher: Nature Publishing Group.
  122. Uncertainty is maintained and used in working memory. Journal of Vision, 21(8):13.
  123. Bayesian decision theory and psychophysics. Publisher: Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics.
  124. Distributional Population Codes and Multiple Motion Models. In Kearns, M., Solla, S., and Cohn, D., editors, Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, volume 11. MIT Press.
  125. Probabilistic Interpretation of Population Codes. Neural Computation, 10(2):403–430.
  126. Cortical representations of confidence in a visual perceptual decision. Nature Communications, 5(1):3940. Number: 1 Publisher: Nature Publishing Group.
Citations (1)

Summary

Paper to Video (Beta)

Whiteboard

No one has generated a whiteboard explanation for this paper yet.

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

Tweets

Sign up for free to view the 3 tweets with 80 likes about this paper.