Literature DB >> 32359428

Generative Feedback Explains Distinct Brain Activity Codes for Seen and Mental Images.

Jesse L Breedlove1, Ghislain St-Yves1, Cheryl A Olman2, Thomas Naselaris3.   

Abstract

The relationship between mental imagery and vision is a long-standing problem in neuroscience. Currently, it is not known whether differences between the activity evoked during vision and reinstated during imagery reflect different codes for seen and mental images. To address this problem, we modeled mental imagery in the human brain as feedback in a hierarchical generative network. Such networks synthesize images by feeding abstract representations from higher to lower levels of the network hierarchy. When higher processing levels are less sensitive to stimulus variation than lower processing levels, as in the human brain, activity in low-level visual areas should encode variation in mental images with less precision than seen images. To test this prediction, we conducted an fMRI experiment in which subjects imagined and then viewed hundreds of spatially varying naturalistic stimuli. To analyze these data, we developed imagery-encoding models. These models accurately predicted brain responses to imagined stimuli and enabled accurate decoding of their position and content. They also allowed us to compare, for every voxel, tuning to seen and imagined spatial frequencies, as well as the location and size of receptive fields in visual and imagined space. We confirmed our prediction, showing that, in low-level visual areas, imagined spatial frequencies in individual voxels are reduced relative to seen spatial frequencies and that receptive fields in imagined space are larger than in visual space. These findings reveal distinct codes for seen and mental images and link mental imagery to the computational abilities of generative networks.
Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  encoding models; fMRI; generative network; mental imagery; receptive fields; vision

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32359428     DOI: 10.1016/j.cub.2020.04.014

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Curr Biol        ISSN: 0960-9822            Impact factor:   10.900


  11 in total

1.  Relative precision of top-down attentional modulations is lower in early visual cortex compared to mid- and high-level visual areas.

Authors:  Sunyoung Park; John T Serences
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2022-01-12       Impact factor: 2.714

2.  Voluntary control of semantic neural representations by imagery with conflicting visual stimulation.

Authors:  Ryohei Fukuma; Takufumi Yanagisawa; Shinji Nishimoto; Hidenori Sugano; Kentaro Tamura; Shota Yamamoto; Yasushi Iimura; Yuya Fujita; Satoru Oshino; Naoki Tani; Naoko Koide-Majima; Yukiyasu Kamitani; Haruhiko Kishima
Journal:  Commun Biol       Date:  2022-03-18

3.  A massive 7T fMRI dataset to bridge cognitive neuroscience and artificial intelligence.

Authors:  Emily J Allen; Ghislain St-Yves; Yihan Wu; Jesse L Breedlove; Jacob S Prince; Logan T Dowdle; Matthias Nau; Brad Caron; Franco Pestilli; Ian Charest; J Benjamin Hutchinson; Thomas Naselaris; Kendrick Kay
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2021-12-16       Impact factor: 28.771

4.  Perception and memory have distinct spatial tuning properties in human visual cortex.

Authors:  Serra E Favila; Brice A Kuhl; Jonathan Winawer
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2022-10-18       Impact factor: 17.694

Review 5.  The Face of Image Reconstruction: Progress, Pitfalls, Prospects.

Authors:  Adrian Nestor; Andy C H Lee; David C Plaut; Marlene Behrmann
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2020-07-13       Impact factor: 20.229

Review 6.  Transforming the Concept of Memory Reactivation.

Authors:  Serra E Favila; Hongmi Lee; Brice A Kuhl
Journal:  Trends Neurosci       Date:  2020-10-08       Impact factor: 13.837

7.  Joint representation of working memory and uncertainty in human cortex.

Authors:  Hsin-Hung Li; Thomas C Sprague; Aspen H Yoo; Wei Ji Ma; Clayton E Curtis
Journal:  Neuron       Date:  2021-09-14       Impact factor: 17.173

8.  Topographic connectivity reveals task-dependent retinotopic processing throughout the human brain.

Authors:  Tomas Knapen
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2021-01-12       Impact factor: 11.205

9.  Behavioral and Neural Signatures of Visual Imagery Vividness Extremes: Aphantasia versus Hyperphantasia.

Authors:  Fraser Milton; Jon Fulford; Carla Dance; James Gaddum; Brittany Heuerman-Williamson; Kealan Jones; Kathryn F Knight; Matthew MacKisack; Crawford Winlove; Adam Zeman
Journal:  Cereb Cortex Commun       Date:  2021-05-05

10.  Working memory representations in visual cortex mediate distraction effects.

Authors:  Grace E Hallenbeck; Thomas C Sprague; Masih Rahmati; Kartik K Sreenivasan; Clayton E Curtis
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2021-08-05       Impact factor: 14.919

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.