4.8 Article

Single-trial spike trains in parietal cortex reveal discrete steps during decision-making

Journal

SCIENCE
Volume 349, Issue 6244, Pages 184-187

Publisher

AMER ASSOC ADVANCEMENT SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1126/science.aaa4056

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Eye Institute [EY017366]
  2. National Institute of Mental Health [MH099611]
  3. Sloan Foundation
  4. McKnight Foundation
  5. National Science Foundation CAREER award [IIS-1150186]
  6. National Institutes of Health under Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service from the National Institute on Drug Abuse [T32DA018926]
  7. National Institutes of Health under Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service from National Eye Institute [T32EY021462]
  8. Direct For Computer & Info Scie & Enginr
  9. Div Of Information & Intelligent Systems [1150186] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  10. Div Of Information & Intelligent Systems
  11. Direct For Computer & Info Scie & Enginr [1601115] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Neurons in the macaque lateral intraparietal (LIP) area exhibit firing rates that appear to ramp upward or downward during decision-making. These ramps are commonly assumed to reflect the gradual accumulation of evidence toward a decision threshold. However, the ramping in trial-averaged responses could instead arise from instantaneous jumps at different times on different trials. We examined single-trial responses in LIP using statistical methods for fitting and comparing latent dynamical spike-train models. We compared models with latent spike rates governed by either continuous diffusion-to-bound dynamics or discrete stepping dynamics. Roughly three-quarters of the choice-selective neurons we recorded were better described by the stepping model. Moreover, the inferred steps carried more information about the animal's choice than spike counts.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available