Literature DB >> 20691790

Encoding and decoding in fMRI.

Thomas Naselaris1, Kendrick N Kay, Shinji Nishimoto, Jack L Gallant.   

Abstract

Over the past decade fMRI researchers have developed increasingly sensitive techniques for analyzing the information represented in BOLD activity. The most popular of these techniques is linear classification, a simple technique for decoding information about experimental stimuli or tasks from patterns of activity across an array of voxels. A more recent development is the voxel-based encoding model, which describes the information about the stimulus or task that is represented in the activity of single voxels. Encoding and decoding are complementary operations: encoding uses stimuli to predict activity while decoding uses activity to predict information about the stimuli. However, in practice these two operations are often confused, and their respective strengths and weaknesses have not been made clear. Here we use the concept of a linearizing feature space to clarify the relationship between encoding and decoding. We show that encoding and decoding operations can both be used to investigate some of the most common questions about how information is represented in the brain. However, focusing on encoding models offers two important advantages over decoding. First, an encoding model can in principle provide a complete functional description of a region of interest, while a decoding model can provide only a partial description. Second, while it is straightforward to derive an optimal decoding model from an encoding model it is much more difficult to derive an encoding model from a decoding model. We propose a systematic modeling approach that begins by estimating an encoding model for every voxel in a scan and ends by using the estimated encoding models to perform decoding. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20691790      PMCID: PMC3037423          DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.07.073

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neuroimage        ISSN: 1053-8119            Impact factor:   6.556


  89 in total

1.  Dynamics of spatial frequency tuning in macaque V1.

Authors:  C E Bredfeldt; D L Ringach
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2002-03-01       Impact factor: 6.167

2.  Bayesian inference with probabilistic population codes.

Authors:  Wei Ji Ma; Jeffrey M Beck; Peter E Latham; Alexandre Pouget
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2006-10-22       Impact factor: 24.884

Review 3.  Decoding mental states from brain activity in humans.

Authors:  John-Dylan Haynes; Geraint Rees
Journal:  Nat Rev Neurosci       Date:  2006-07       Impact factor: 34.870

Review 4.  Distributed hierarchical processing in the primate cerebral cortex.

Authors:  D J Felleman; D C Van Essen
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  1991 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 5.357

5.  Predicting neuronal responses during natural vision.

Authors:  Stephen V David; Jack L Gallant
Journal:  Network       Date:  2005 Jun-Sep       Impact factor: 1.273

6.  Decoding cognitive control in human parietal cortex.

Authors:  Michael Esterman; Yu-Chin Chiu; Benjamin J Tamber-Rosenau; Steven Yantis
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2009-10-05       Impact factor: 11.205

7.  Reproducibility distinguishes conscious from nonconscious neural representations.

Authors:  Aaron Schurger; Francisco Pereira; Anne Treisman; Jonathan D Cohen
Journal:  Science       Date:  2009-11-12       Impact factor: 47.728

8.  The spectro-temporal receptive field. A functional characteristic of auditory neurons.

Authors:  A M Aertsen; P I Johannesma
Journal:  Biol Cybern       Date:  1981       Impact factor: 2.086

9.  Sparse linear regression for reconstructing muscle activity from human cortical fMRI.

Authors:  G Ganesh; E Burdet; M Haruno; M Kawato
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2008-06-25       Impact factor: 6.556

10.  Identifying natural images from human brain activity.

Authors:  Kendrick N Kay; Thomas Naselaris; Ryan J Prenger; Jack L Gallant
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2008-03-05       Impact factor: 49.962

View more
  218 in total

1.  Identifying fragments of natural speech from the listener's MEG signals.

Authors:  Miika Koskinen; Jaakko Viinikanoja; Mikko Kurimo; Arto Klami; Samuel Kaski; Riitta Hari
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2012-02-17       Impact factor: 5.038

2.  Optimal deployment of attentional gain during fine discriminations.

Authors:  Miranda Scolari; Anna Byers; John T Serences
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2012-05-30       Impact factor: 6.167

Review 3.  Connectivity-based parcellation: Critique and implications.

Authors:  Simon B Eickhoff; Bertrand Thirion; Gaël Varoquaux; Danilo Bzdok
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2015-09-27       Impact factor: 5.038

4.  Frequency spectrum might act as communication code between retina and visual cortex I.

Authors:  Xu Yang; Bo Gong; Jian-Wei Lu
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2015-12-18       Impact factor: 1.779

5.  Neural responses to natural and model-matched stimuli reveal distinct computations in primary and nonprimary auditory cortex.

Authors:  Sam V Norman-Haignere; Josh H McDermott
Journal:  PLoS Biol       Date:  2018-12-03       Impact factor: 8.029

6.  The influence of low-level stimulus features on the representation of contexts, items, and their mnemonic associations.

Authors:  Derek J Huffman; Craig E L Stark
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2017-04-08       Impact factor: 6.556

7.  Individual prediction of chronic motor outcome in the acute post-stroke stage: Behavioral parameters versus functional imaging.

Authors:  Anne K Rehme; Lukas J Volz; Delia-Lisa Feis; Simon B Eickhoff; Gereon R Fink; Christian Grefkes
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2015-08-19       Impact factor: 5.038

8.  Similarity judgments and cortical visual responses reflect different properties of object and scene categories in naturalistic images.

Authors:  Marcie L King; Iris I A Groen; Adam Steel; Dwight J Kravitz; Chris I Baker
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2019-05-01       Impact factor: 6.556

Review 9.  Visual attention mitigates information loss in small- and large-scale neural codes.

Authors:  Thomas C Sprague; Sameer Saproo; John T Serences
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2015-03-11       Impact factor: 20.229

10.  Linking signal detection theory and encoding models to reveal independent neural representations from neuroimaging data.

Authors:  Fabian A Soto; Lauren E Vucovich; F Gregory Ashby
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2018-10-01       Impact factor: 4.475

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.