Literature DB >> 17598148

Which computational mechanisms operate in the hippocampus during novelty detection?

Dharshan Kumaran1, Eleanor A Maguire.   

Abstract

A fundamental property of adaptive behavior is the ability to rapidly distinguish what is novel from what is familiar in our environment. Empirical evidence and computational work have provided biologically plausible models of the neural substrate and mechanisms underlying the coding of stimulus novelty in the perirhinal cortex. In this article, we highlight the importance of a different category of novelty, namely associative novelty, which has received relatively little attention, despite its clear ecological importance. While previous studies in both animals and humans have documented hippocampal responses in relation to associative novelty, a key issue concerning the computations underlying these novelty signals has not been previously addressed. We argue that this question has importance not only for our understanding of novelty processing, but also for advancing our knowledge of the fundamental computational operations performed by the hippocampus. We suggest a different approach to this problem, and discuss recent evidence supporting the hypothesis that the hippocampus operates as a comparator during the processing of associative novelty, generating mismatch/novelty signals when prior predictions are violated by sensory reality. We also draw on conceptual similarities between associative novelty and contextual novelty to suggest that empirical findings from these two seemingly distant research fields accord with the operation of a comparator mechanism during novelty detection more generally. We therefore conclude that a comparator mechanism may underlie the role of the hippocampus not only in detecting occurrences that are unexpected given specific associatively retrieved predictions, but also events that violate more abstract properties of the experimental context. (c) 2007 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17598148     DOI: 10.1002/hipo.20326

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hippocampus        ISSN: 1050-9631            Impact factor:   3.899


  69 in total

1.  Distances between real-world locations are represented in the human hippocampus.

Authors:  Lindsay K Morgan; Sean P Macevoy; Geoffrey K Aguirre; Russell A Epstein
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2011-01-26       Impact factor: 6.167

2.  Dopamine-glutamate interplay in the ventral striatum modulates spatial learning in a receptor subtype-dependent manner.

Authors:  Roberto Coccurello; Alberto Oliverio; Andrea Mele
Journal:  Neuropsychopharmacology       Date:  2012-01-04       Impact factor: 7.853

Review 3.  Modeling working memory: an interference model of complex span.

Authors:  Klaus Oberauer; Stephan Lewandowsky; Simon Farrell; Christopher Jarrold; Martin Greaves
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2012-10

4.  Implicit perceptual anticipation triggered by statistical learning.

Authors:  Nicholas B Turk-Browne; Brian J Scholl; Marcia K Johnson; Marvin M Chun
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2010-08-18       Impact factor: 6.167

5.  Medial temporal lobe activity predicts successful relational memory binding.

Authors:  Deborah E Hannula; Charan Ranganath
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2008-01-02       Impact factor: 6.167

6.  Neural correlates of exemplar novelty processing under different spatial attention conditions.

Authors:  Christian Michael Stoppel; Carsten Nicolas Boehler; Hendrik Strumpf; Hans-Jochen Heinze; Jens Max Hopf; Emrah Düzel; Mircea Ariel Schoenfeld
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 5.038

7.  Environmental novelty is associated with a selective increase in Fos expression in the output elements of the hippocampal formation and the perirhinal cortex.

Authors:  Michael VanElzakker; Rebecca D Fevurly; Tressa Breindel; Robert L Spencer
Journal:  Learn Mem       Date:  2008-12-02       Impact factor: 2.460

8.  Greater working memory load results in greater medial temporal activity at retrieval.

Authors:  Karin Schon; Yakeel T Quiroz; Michael E Hasselmo; Chantal E Stern
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2009-02-18       Impact factor: 5.357

9.  Prolegomena to a neurocomputational architecture for human grammatical encoding and decoding.

Authors:  Gerard Kempen
Journal:  Neuroinformatics       Date:  2014-01

Review 10.  Learning task-state representations.

Authors:  Yael Niv
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2019-09-24       Impact factor: 24.884

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.