4.7 Article

Effective learning is accompanied by high-dimensional and efficient representations of neural activity

期刊

NATURE NEUROSCIENCE
卷 22, 期 6, 页码 1000-+

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41593-019-0400-9

关键词

-

资金

  1. J.D. and C.T. MacArthur Foundation
  2. A.P. Sloan Foundation
  3. ISI Foundation
  4. Paul G. Allen Family Foundation
  5. US Army Research Laboratory [W911NF-10-20022]
  6. Army Research Office [W911NF-141-0679, W911NF-16-1-0474, W911NF17-2-0181]
  7. Office of Naval Research
  8. National Institute of Mental Health [2-R01-DC-009209-11, R01MH112847, R01-MH107235, R21-M MH-106799]
  9. Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development [1R01HD086888-01]
  10. National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke [R01 NS099348]
  11. National Science Foundation [BCS-1441502, BCS-1430087, NSF PHY-1554488, BCS-1631550]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A fundamental cognitive process is to map value and identity onto the objects we learn about. However, what space best embeds this mapping is not completely understood. Here we develop tools to quantify the space and organization of such a mapping in neural responses as reflected in functional MRI, to show that quick learners have a higher dimensional representation than slow learners, and hence more easily distinguishable whole-brain responses to objects of different value. Furthermore, we find that quick learners display more compact embedding of their neural responses, and hence have higher ratios of their stimuli dimension to their embedding dimension, which is consistent with greater efficiency of cognitive coding. Lastly, we investigate the neurophysiological drivers at smaller scales and study the complementary distinguishability of whole-brain responses. Our results demonstrate a spatial organization of neural responses characteristic of learning and offer geometric measures applicable to identifying efficient coding in higher-order cognitive processes.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据