↓ Skip to main content

An Efficient Coding Hypothesis Links Sparsity and Selectivity of Neural Responses

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, October 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
74 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
An Efficient Coding Hypothesis Links Sparsity and Selectivity of Neural Responses
Published in
PLOS ONE, October 2011
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0025506
Pubmed ID
Authors

Florian Blättler, Richard H. R. Hahnloser

Abstract

To what extent are sensory responses in the brain compatible with first-order principles? The efficient coding hypothesis projects that neurons use as few spikes as possible to faithfully represent natural stimuli. However, many sparsely firing neurons in higher brain areas seem to violate this hypothesis in that they respond more to familiar stimuli than to nonfamiliar stimuli. We reconcile this discrepancy by showing that efficient sensory responses give rise to stimulus selectivity that depends on the stimulus-independent firing threshold and the balance between excitatory and inhibitory inputs. We construct a cost function that enforces minimal firing rates in model neurons by linearly punishing suprathreshold synaptic currents. By contrast, subthreshold currents are punished quadratically, which allows us to optimally reconstruct sensory inputs from elicited responses. We train synaptic currents on many renditions of a particular bird's own song (BOS) and few renditions of conspecific birds' songs (CONs). During training, model neurons develop a response selectivity with complex dependence on the firing threshold. At low thresholds, they fire densely and prefer CON and the reverse BOS (REV) over BOS. However, at high thresholds or when hyperpolarized, they fire sparsely and prefer BOS over REV and over CON. Based on this selectivity reversal, our model suggests that preference for a highly familiar stimulus corresponds to a high-threshold or strong-inhibition regime of an efficient coding strategy. Our findings apply to songbird mirror neurons, and in general, they suggest that the brain may be endowed with simple mechanisms to rapidly change selectivity of neural responses to focus sensory processing on either familiar or nonfamiliar stimuli. In summary, we find support for the efficient coding hypothesis and provide new insights into the interplay between the sparsity and selectivity of neural responses.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 74 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 2 3%
United Kingdom 2 3%
France 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Poland 1 1%
Unknown 66 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 34 46%
Researcher 11 15%
Student > Master 9 12%
Professor 5 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 4%
Other 7 9%
Unknown 5 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 28 38%
Computer Science 9 12%
Neuroscience 7 9%
Psychology 5 7%
Engineering 5 7%
Other 14 19%
Unknown 6 8%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 March 2014.
All research outputs
#6,375,151
of 22,653,392 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#76,279
of 193,422 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38,224
of 135,895 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#831
of 2,569 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,653,392 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,422 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 135,895 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2,569 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.