Literature DB >> 28793239

Ghosts in machine learning for cognitive neuroscience: Moving from data to theory.

Thomas Carlson1, Erin Goddard2, David M Kaplan3, Colin Klein4, J Brendan Ritchie5.   

Abstract

The application of machine learning methods to neuroimaging data has fundamentally altered the field of cognitive neuroscience. Future progress in understanding brain function using these methods will require addressing a number of key methodological and interpretive challenges. Because these challenges often remain unseen and metaphorically "haunt" our efforts to use these methods to understand the brain, we refer to them as "ghosts". In this paper, we describe three such ghosts, situate them within a more general framework from philosophy of science, and then describe steps to address them. The first ghost arises from difficulties in determining what information machine learning classifiers use for decoding. The second ghost arises from the interplay of experimental design and the structure of information in the brain - that is, our methods embody implicit assumptions about information processing in the brain, and it is often difficult to determine if those assumptions are satisfied. The third ghost emerges from our limited ability to distinguish information that is merely decodable from the brain from information that is represented and used by the brain. Each of the three ghosts place limits on the interpretability of decoding research in cognitive neuroscience. There are no easy solutions, but facing these issues squarely will provide a clearer path to understanding the nature of representation and computation in the human brain. Crown
Copyright © 2017. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Brain decoding; Exploratory methods; Magnetoencephalography; Multivariate pattern analysis; fMRI

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28793239     DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.08.019

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


  5 in total

Review 1.  A Shared Vision for Machine Learning in Neuroscience.

Authors:  Mai-Anh T Vu; Tülay Adalı; Demba Ba; György Buzsáki; David Carlson; Katherine Heller; Conor Liston; Cynthia Rudin; Vikaas S Sohal; Alik S Widge; Helen S Mayberg; Guillermo Sapiro; Kafui Dzirasa
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2018-01-26       Impact factor: 6.709

2.  Simple Acoustic Features Can Explain Phoneme-Based Predictions of Cortical Responses to Speech.

Authors:  Christoph Daube; Robin A A Ince; Joachim Gross
Journal:  Curr Biol       Date:  2019-05-23       Impact factor: 10.834

3.  Monkey EEG links neuronal color and motion information across species and scales.

Authors:  Florian Sandhaeger; Constantin von Nicolai; Earl K Miller; Markus Siegel
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2019-07-09       Impact factor: 8.140

4.  No evidence for confounding orientation-dependent fixational eye movements under baseline conditions.

Authors:  Jordy Thielen; Rob van Lier; Marcel van Gerven
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-08-03       Impact factor: 4.379

5.  Predicting Sex From EEG: Validity and Generalizability of Deep-Learning-Based Interpretable Classifier.

Authors:  Barbora Bučková; Martin Brunovský; Martin Bareš; Jaroslav Hlinka
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2020-10-27       Impact factor: 4.677

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.