Abstract
A central goal of neuroscience is to understand the representations formed by brain activity patterns and their connection to behaviour. The classic approach is to investigate how individual neurons encode stimuli and how their tuning determines the fidelity of the neural representation. Tuning analyses often use the Fisher information to characterize the sensitivity of neural responses to small changes of the stimulus. In recent decades, measurements of large populations of neurons have motivated a complementary approach, which focuses on the information available to linear decoders. The decodable information is captured by the geometry of the representational patterns in the multivariate response space. Here we review neural tuning and representational geometry with the goal of clarifying the relationship between them. The tuning induces the geometry, but different sets of tuned neurons can induce the same geometry. The geometry determines the Fisher information, the mutual information and the behavioural performance of an ideal observer in a range of psychophysical tasks. We argue that future studies can benefit from considering both tuning and geometry to understand neural codes and reveal the connections between stimuli, brain activity and behaviour.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals
Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription
$29.99 / 30 days
cancel any time
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 print issues and online access
$189.00 per year
only $15.75 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
References
DeCharms, C. R. & Zador, A. Neural representation and the cortical code. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 23, 613–647 (2000).
Kriegeskorte, N. & Douglas, P. K. Interpreting encoding and decoding models. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 55, 167–179 (2019).
Barlow, H. B., Blakemore, C. & Pettigrew, J. D. The neural mechanism of binocular depth discrimination. J. Physiol. 193, 327–342 (1967).
Campbell, F. W., Cleland, B. G., Cooper, G. F. & Enroth-Cugell, C. The angular selectivity of visual cortical cells to moving gratings. J. Physiol. 198, 237–250 (1968).
Blakemore, C., Fiorentini, A. & Maffei, L. A second neural mechanism of binocular depth discrimination. J. Physiol. 226, 725–749 (1972).
Geoffrey, H., Henry, B., Dreher & Bishop, P. O. Orientation specificity of cells in cat striate cortex. J. Neurophysiol. 37, 1394–1409 (1974).
Hubel, D. H. & Wiesel, T. N. Receptive fields of single neurones in the cat’s striate cortex. J. Physiol. 148, 574–591 (1959).
Hubel, D. H. & Wiesel, T. N. Receptive fields, binocular interaction and functional architecture in the cat’s visual cortex. J. Physiol. 160, 106–154 (1962).
Hubel, D. H. & Wiesel, T. N. Receptive fields and functional architecture of monkey striate cortex. J. Physiol. 195, 215–243 (1968).
Rose, D. & Blakemore, C. An analysis of orientation selectivity in the cat’s visual cortex. Exp. Brain Res. 20, 1–17 (1974).
Swindale, N. V. Orientation tuning curves: empirical description and estimation of parameters. Biol. Cybern. 78, 45–56 (1998).
Georgopoulos, A. P., Schwartz, A. B. & Kettner, R. E. Neuronal population coding of movement direction. Science 233, 1416–1419 (1986).
Rani Ben-Yishai, R., Bar-Or, L. & Sompolinsky, H. Theory of orientation tuning in visual cortex. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 92, 3844–3848 (1995).
Anderson, J. S., Lampl, I., Gillespie, D. C. & Ferster, D. The contribution of noise to contrast invariance of orientation tuning in cat visual cortex. Science 290, 1968–1972 (2000).
Seriès, P., Latham, P. E. & Pouget, A. Tuning curve sharpening for orientation selectivity: coding efficiency and the impact of correlations. Nat. Neurosci. 7, 1129–1135 (2004).
Butts, D. A. & Goldman, M. S. Tuning curves, neuronal variability, and sensory coding. PLoS Biol. 4, e92 (2006).
Campbell, F. W., Cooper, G. F. & Enroth-Cugell, C. The spatial selectivity of the visual cells of the cat. J. Physiol. 203, 223–235 (1969).
Goldberg, J. M. & Brown, P. B. Response of binaural neurons of dog superior olivary complex to dichotic tonal stimuli: some physiological mechanisms of sound localization. J. Neurophysiol. 32, 613–636 (1969).
Suga, N. Amplitude spectrum representation in the Doppler-shifted-CF processing area of the auditory cortex of the mustache bat. Science 196, 64–67 (1977).
O’Keefe, J. & Nadel, L. The Hippocampus as a Cognitive Map (Oxford Clarendon, 1978).
Knudsen, E. I. Auditory and visual maps of space in the optic tectum of the owl. J. Neurosci. 2, 1177–1194 (1982).
Maunsell, J. H. & Van Essen, D. C. Functional properties of neurons in middle temporal visual area of the macaque monkey. I. Selectivity for stimulus direction, speed, and orientation. J. Neurophysiol. 49, 1127–1147 (1983).
Taube, J. S., Muller, R. U. & Ranck, J. B. Head-direction cells recorded from the postsubiculum in freely moving rats. I. Description and quantitative analysis. J. Neurosci. 10, 420–435 (1990).
DeAngelis, G. C., Ohzawa, I. & Freeman, R. D. Depth is encoded in the visual cortex by a specialized receptive field structure. Nature 352, 156–159 (1991).
Johnson, K. O. & Hsiao, S. S. Neural mechanisms of tactual form and texture perception. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 15, 227–250 (1992).
Gallant, J. L. et al. Neural responses to polar, hyperbolic, and Cartesian gratings in area V4 of the macaque monkey. J. Neurophysiol. 76, 2718–2739 (1996).
Pasupathy, A. & Connor, C. E. Population coding of shape in area V4. Nat. Neurosci. 5, 1332–1338 (2002).
Nieder, A., Freedman, D. J. & Miller, E. K. Representation of the quantity of visual items in the primate prefrontal cortex. Science 297, 1708–1711 (2002).
Fyhn, M., Molden, S., Witter, M. P., Moser, E. I. & Moser, M.-B. Spatial representation in the entorhinal cortex. Science 305, 1258–1264 (2004).
Hafting, T., Fyhn, M., Molden, S., Moser, M.-B. & Moser, E. I. Microstructure of a spatial map in the entorhinal cortex. Nature 436, 801–806 (2005).
Young, M. P. & Yamane, S. Sparse population coding of faces in the inferotemporal cortex. Science 256, 1327–1331 (1992).
Tsao, D. Y., Freiwald, W. A., Tootell, R. B. H. & Livingstone, M. S. A cortical region consisting entirely of face-selective cells. Science 311, 670–674 (2006).
Rigotti, M. et al. The importance of mixed selectivity in complex cognitive tasks. Nature 497, 585–590 (2013).
Chang, L. & Tsao, D. Y. The code for facial identity in the primate brain. Cell 169, 1013–1028 (2017).
Maffei, L. & Fiorentini, A. The unresponsive regions of visual cortical receptive fields. Vis. Res. 16, 1131–1139 (1976).
Gilbert, C. D. & Wiesel, T. N. The influence of contextual stimuli on the orientation selectivity of cells in primary visual cortex of the cat. Vis. Res. 30, 1689–1701 (1990).
Knierim, J. J. & Van Essen, D. C. Neuronal responses to static texture patterns in area V1 of the alert macaque monkey. J. Neurophysiol. 67, 961–980 (1992).
Maffei, L., Fiorentini, A. & Bisti, S. Neural correlate of perceptual adaptation to gratings. Science 182, 1036–1038 (1973).
Movshon, J. A. & Lennie, P. Pattern-selective adaptation in visual cortical neurones. Nature 278, 850–852 (1979).
Dragoi, V., Sharma, J. & Sur, M. Adaptation-induced plasticity of orientation tuning in adult visual cortex. Neuron 28, 287–298 (2000).
Benucci, A., Saleem, A. B. & Carandini, M. Adaptation maintains population homeostasis in primary visual cortex. Nat. Neurosci. 16, 724–729 (2013).
Dean, I., Harper, N. S. & McAlpine, D. Neural population coding of sound level adapts to stimulus statistics. Nat. Neurosci. 8, 1684–1689 (2005).
Ulanovsky, N., Las, L., Farkas, D. & Nelken, I. Multiple time scales of adaptation in auditory cortex neurons. J. Neurosci. 24, 10440–10453 (2004).
Grill-Spector, K., Henson, R. & Martin, A. Repetition and the brain: neural models of stimulus-specific effects. Trends Cognit. Sci. 10, 14–23 (2006).
Solomon, S. G. & Kohn, A. Moving sensory adaptation beyond suppressive effects in single neurons. Curr. Biol. 24, R1012–R1022 (2014).
Alink, A., Abdulrahman, H. & Henson, R. N. Forward models demonstrate that repetition suppression is best modelled by local neural scaling. Nat. Commun. 9, 1–10 (2018).
Treue, S. & Martinez Trujillo, J. C. Feature-based attention influences motion processing gain in macaque visual cortex. Nature 399, 575–579 (1999).
McAdams, C. J. & Maunsell, J. H. Effects of attention on orientation-tuning functions of single neurons in macaque cortical area V4. J. Neurosci. 19, 431–441 (1999).
Reynolds, J. H., Pasternak, T. & Desimone, R. Attention increases sensitivity of V4 neurons. Neuron 26, 703–714 (2000).
Schoups, A., Vogels, R., Qian, N. & Orban, G. Practising orientation identification improves orientation coding in V1 neurons. Nature 412, 549–553 (2001).
Ghose, G. M., Yang, T. & Maunsell, J. H. Physiological correlates of perceptual learning in monkey V1 and V2. J. Neurophysiol. 87, 1867–1888 (2002).
Crist, R. E., Li, W. & Gilbert, C. D. Learning to see: experience and attention in primary visual cortex. Nat. Neurosci. 4, 519–525 (2001).
Churchland, M. M. et al. Neural population dynamics during reaching. Nature, 487, 51–56 (2012).
Shenoy, K. V., Sahani, M. & Churchland, M. M. Cortical control of arm movements: a dynamical systems perspective. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 36, 337–359 (2013).
Churchland, A. K. et al. Variance as a signature of neural computations during decision making. Neuron 69, 818–831 (2011).
Buzsáki, G. Large-scale recording of neuronal ensembles. Nat. Neurosci. 7, 446–451 (2004).
Stevenson, I. H. & Kording, K. P. How advances in neural recording affect data analysis. Nat. Neurosci. 14, 139–142 (2011).
Jun, J. J. et al. Fully integrated silicon probes for high-density recording of neural activity. Nature, 551, 232–236 (2017).
Biswal, B., Yetkin, F. Z., Haughton, V. M. & Hyde, J. S. Functional connectivity in the motor cortex of resting human brain using echo-planar MRI. Magn. Reson. Med. 34, 537–541 (1995).
Fox, M. D. & Raichle, M. E. Spontaneous fluctuations in brain activity observed with functional magnetic resonance imaging. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 8, 700–711 (2007).
Shepard, R. N. & Chipman, S. Second-order isomorphism of internal representations: shapes of states. Cognit. Psychol. 1, 1–17 (1970).
Edelman, S., Grill-Spector, K., Kushnir, T. & Malach, R. Toward direct visualization of the internal shape representation space by fMRI. Psychobiology 26, 309–321 (1998).
Edelman, S. Representation is representation of similarities. Behav. Brain Sci. 21, 449–467 (1998).
Norman, K. A., Polyn, S. M., Detre, G. J. & Haxby, J. V. Beyond mind-reading: multi-voxel pattern analysis of fMRI data. Trends Cognit. Sci. 10, 424–430 (2006).
Diedrichsen, J. & Kriegeskorte, N. Representational models: a common framework for understanding encoding, pattern-component, and representational-similarity analysis. PLoS Comput. Biol. 13, e1005508 (2017).
Kriegeskorte, N., Mur, M. & Bandettini, P. Representational similarity analysis — connecting the branches of systems neuroscience. Front. Syst. Neurosci. 2, 4 (2008).
Kriegeskorte, N. et al. Matching categorical object representations in inferior temporal cortex of man and monkey. Neuron 60, 1126–1141 (2008).
Connolly, A. C. et al. The representation of biological classes in the human brain. J. Neurosci. 32, 2608–2618 (2012).
Xue, G. et al. Greater neural pattern similarity across repetitions is associated with better memory. Science 330, 97–101 (2010).
Khaligh-Razavi, S.-M. & Kriegeskorte, N. Deep supervised, but not unsupervised, models may explain IT cortical representation. PLoS Comput. Biol. 10, e1003915 (2014).
Yamins, D. L. K. et al. Performance-optimized hierarchical models predict neural responses in higher visual cortex. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, 8619–8624 (2014).
Cichy, R. M., Pantazis, D. & Oliva, A. Resolving human object recognition in space and time. Nat. Neurosci. 17, 455–462 (2014).
Freeman, J. B., Stolier, R. M., Brooks, J. A. & Stillerman, B. S. The neural representational geometry of social perception. Curr. Opin. Psychol. 24, 83–91 (2018).
Kietzmann, T. C., Spoerer, C. J., Sörensen, L. K. A., Cichy, R. M., Hauk, O. & Kriegeskorte, N. Recurrence is required to capture the representational dynamics of the human visual system. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 116, 21854–21863 (2019).
Kriegeskorte, N. & Diedrichsen, J. Peeling the onion of brain representations. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 42, 407–432 (2019).
Nili, H. et al. A toolbox for representational similarity analysis. PLoS Comput. Biol. 10, e1003553 (2014).
Kriegeskorte, N. & Diedrichsen, J. Inferring brain-computational mechanisms with models of activity measurements. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 371, 20160278 (2016).
Kriegeskorte, N. & Kievit, R. A. Representational geometry: integrating cognition, computation, and the brain. Trends Cognit. Sci. 17, 401–412 (2013).
Dumoulin, S. O. & Wandell, B. A. Population receptive field estimates in human visual cortex. Neuroimage 39, 647–660 (2008).
Kay, K. N., Naselaris, T., Prenger, R. J. & Gallant, J. L. Identifying natural images from human brain activity. Nature, 452, 352–355 (2008).
Naselaris, T., Prenger, R. J., Kay, K. N., Oliver, M. & Gallant, J. L. Bayesian reconstruction of natural images from human brain activity. Neuron 63, 902–915 (2009).
Tsao, W. A. & Tsao, D. Y. Functional compartmentalization and viewpoint generalization within the macaque face-processing system. Science 330, 845–851 (2010).
Ringach, D. L. The geometry of masking in neural populations. Nat. Commun. 10, 1–11 (2019).
Fisher, R. A. On the mathematical foundations of theoretical statistics. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A 222, 309–368 (1922).
Shannon, C. E. A mathematical theory of communication. Bell Syst. Tech. J. 27, 379–423 (1948).
de Ruyter van Steveninck, R. R., Lewen, G. D., Strong, S. P., Koberle, R. & Bialek., W. Reproducibility and variability in neural spike trains. Science 275, 1805–1808 (1997).
Rieke, F. et al. Spikes: Exploring the Neural Code (MIT Press, 1999).
Thorst, A. & Theunissen, F. E. Information theory and neural coding. Nat. Neurosci. 2, 947–957 (1999).
Fairhall, A. L., Lewen, G. D., Bialek, W. & de Ruyter van Steveninck, R. R. Efficiency and ambiguity in an adaptive neural code. Nature 412, 787–792 (2001).
Theunissen, F. E. & Miller, J. P. Representation of sensory information in the cricket cercal sensory system. II. Information theoretic calculation of system accuracy and optimal tuning-curve widths of four primary interneurons. J. Neurophysiol. 66, 1690–1703 (1991).
Roddey, J. C. & Jacobs, G. A. Information theoretic analysis of dynamical encoding by filiform mechanoreceptors in the cricket cercal system. J. Neurophysiol. 75, 1365–1376 (1996).
Theunissen, F. E., Cooper Roddey, J., Stufflebeam, S., Clague, H. & Miller, J. P. Information theoretic analysis of dynamical encoding by four identified primary sensory interneurons in the cricket cercal system. J. Neurophysiol. 75, 1345–1364 (1996).
Brenner, N., Bialek, W. & de Ruyter Van Steveninck, R. Adaptive rescaling maximizes information transmission. Neuron 26, 695–702 (2000).
Ganguli, D. & Simoncelli, E. P. Efficient sensory encoding and Bayesian inference with heterogeneous neural populations. Neural Comput. 26, 2103–2134 (2014).
Wei, X.-X. & Stocker, A. A. A Bayesian observer model constrained by efficient coding can explain ‘anti-Bayesian’ percepts. Nat. Neurosci. 18, 1509–1517 (2015).
Wei, X.-X. & Stocker, A. A. Efficient coding provides a direct link between prior and likelihood in perceptual Bayesian inference. Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst. 25, 1304–1312 (2012).
McDonnell, M. D. & Stocks, N. G. Maximally informative stimuli and tuning curves for sigmoidal rate-coding neurons and populations. Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 058103 (2008).
Barlow, H. B. et al. Possible principles underlying the transformation of sensory messages. Sens. Commun. 1, 217–234 (1961).
Linsker, R. Self-organization in a perceptual network. Computer 21, 105–117 (1988).
Laughlin, S. A simple coding procedure enhances a neuron’s information capacity. Z. für Naturforschung C. 36, 910–912 (1981).
van Hateren, J. H. A theory of maximizing sensory information. Biol. Cybern. 68, 23–29 (1992).
Atick, J. J. Could information theory provide an ecological theory of sensory processing? Network 3, 213–251 (1992).
Dong, D. W. & Atick, J. J. Statistics of natural time-varying images. Network 6, 345–358 (1995).
Olshausen, B. A. & Field, D. J. Emergence of simple-cell receptive field properties by learning a sparse code for natural images. Nature 381, 607–609 (1996).
Bell, A. J. & Sejnowski, T. J. The “independent components” of natural scenes are edge filters. Vis. Res. 37, 3327–3338 (1997).
Simoncelli, E. P. & Olshausen, B. A. Natural image statistics and neural representation. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 24, 1193–1216 (2001).
Ganguli, D. & Simoncelli, E. P. Implicit encoding of prior probabilities in optimal neural populations. Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst. 2010, 658–666 (2010).
Wei, X.-X. & Stocker, A. A. Mutual information, Fisher information, and efficient coding. Neural Comput. 28, 305–326 (2016).
Quiroga, R. Q. & Panzeri, S. Extracting information from neuronal populations: information theory and decoding approaches. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 10, 173–185 (2009).
DeWeese, M. R. & Meister, M. How to measure the information gained from one symbol. Network. 10, 325–340 (1999).
Butts, DanielA. How much information is associated with a particular stimulus? Network 14, 177–187 (2003).
Montgomery, N. & Wehr, M. Auditory cortical neurons convey maximal stimulus-specific information at their best frequency. J. Neurosci. 30, 13362–13366 (2010).
Lehmann, E. L. and Casella, G. Theory of Point Estimation (Springer Science & Business Media, 2006).
Harper, N. S. & McAlpine, D. Optimal neural population coding of an auditory spatial cue. Nature 430, 682–686 (2004).
Gutnisky, D. A. & Dragoi, V. Adaptive coding of visual information in neural populations. Nature 452, 220–224 (2008).
Brunel, N. & Nadal, J.-P. Mutual information, Fisher information, and population coding. Neural Comput. 10, 1731–1757 (1998).
Zhang, K. & Sejnowski, T. J. Neuronal tuning: to sharpen or broaden? Neural Comput. 11, 75–84 (1999).
Pouget, A., Deneve, S., Ducom, J.-C. & Latham, P. E. Narrow versus wide tuning curves: what’s best for a population code? Neural Comput. 11, 85–90 (1999).
Durant, S., Clifford, C. W. G., Crowder, N. A., Price, N. S. C. & Ibbotson, M. R. Characterizing contrast adaptation in a population of cat primary visual cortical neurons using Fisher information. JOSA A 24, 1529–1537 (2007).
Ecker, A. S., Berens, P., Tolias, A. S. & Bethge, M. The effect of noise correlations in populations of diversely tuned neurons. J. Neurosci. 31, 14272–14283 (2011).
Yarrow, S., Challis, E. & Seriès, P. Fisher and Shannon information in finite neural populations. Neural Comput. 24, 1740–1780 (2012).
Lin, I.-C., Okun, M., Carandini, M. & Harris, K. D. The nature of shared cortical variability. Neuron 87, 644–656 (2015).
Arandia-Romero, I., Tanabe, S., Drugowitsch, J., Kohn, A. & Moreno-Bote, R. Multiplicative and additive modulation of neuronal tuning with population activity affects encoded information. Neuron 89, 1305–1316 (2016).
Zohary, E., Shadlen, M. N. & Newsome, W. T. Correlated neuronal discharge rate and its implications for psychophysical performance. Nature 370, 140–143 (1994).
Shadlen, M. N., Britten, K. H., Newsome, W. T. & Movshon, J. A. A computational analysis of the relationship between neuronal and behavioral responses to visual motion. J. Neurosci. 16, 1486–1510 (1996).
Bair, W., Zohary, E. & Newsome, W. T. Correlated firing in macaque visual area MT: time scales and relationship to behavior. J. Neurosci. 21, 1676–1697 (2014).
Kohn, A. & Smith, M. A. Stimulus dependence of neuronal correlation in primary visual cortex of the macaque. J. Neurosci. 25, 3661–3673 (2005).
Cohen, M. R. & Maumsell, J. H. R. Attention improves performance primarily by reducing interneuronal correlations. Nat. Neurosci. 12, 1594–1600 (2009).
Cohen, M. R. & Kohn, A. Measuring and interpreting neuronal correlations. Nat. Neurosci. 14, 811–819 (2011).
Abbott, L. F. & Dayan, Peter The effect of correlated variability on the accuracy of a population code. Neural Comput. 11, 91–101 (1999).
Yoon, H. & Sompolinsky, H. The effect of correlations on the Fisher information of population codes. Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst. 11, 167–173 (1999).
Nirenberg, S. & Latham, P. E. Decoding neuronal spike trains: how important are correlations? Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 100, 7348–7353 (2003).
Latham, P. E. & Nirenberg, S. Synergy, redundancy, and independence in population codes, revisited. J. Neurosci. 25, 5195–5206 (2005).
Pola, G., Thiele, A., Hoffmann, K. P. & Panzeri, S. An exact method to quantify the information transmitted by different mechanisms of correlational coding. Network 14, 35–60 (2003).
Moreno-Bote, R. et al. Information-limiting correlations. Nat. Neurosci. 17, 1410–1417 (2014).
Kafashan, M. M. et al. Scaling of sensory information in large neural populations shows signatures of information-limiting correlations. Nat. Commun. 12, 1–16 (2021).
Averbeck, B. B., Latham, P. E. & Pouget, A. Neural correlations, population coding and computation. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 7, 358–366 (2006).
Kohn, A., Coen-Cagli, R., Kanitscheider, I. & Pouget, A. Correlations and neuronal population information. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 39, 237–256 (2016).
Seung, H. S. & Lee, D. D. The manifold ways of perception. Science 290, 2268–2269 (2000).
DiCarlo, J. J. & Cox, D. D. Untangling invariant object recognition. Trends Cognit. Sci. 11, 333–341 (2007).
Bartlett, M. S. The use of transformations. Biometrics 3, 39–52 (1947).
Green, D. M. et al. Signal Detection Theory and Psychophysics Vol. 1 (Wiley, 1966).
Knill, D. C. & Richards, W. Perception as Bayesian Inference (Cambridge Univ. Press, 1996).
Geisler, W. S. Contributions of ideal observer theory to vision research. Vis. Res. 51, 771–781 (2011).
Tomassini, A., Morgan, M. J. & Solomon, J. A. Orientation uncertainty reduces perceived obliquity. Vis. Res. 50, 541–547 (2010).
Girshick, A. R., Landy, Ml. S. & Simoncelli, E. P. Cardinal rules: visual orientation perception reflects knowledge of environmental statistics. Nat. Neurosci. 14, 926–932 (2011).
Van Bergen, R. S., Ma, W. J., Pratte, M. S. & Jehee, J. F. M. Sensory uncertainty decoded from visual cortex predicts behavior. Nat. Neurosci. 18, 1728–1730 (2015).
Sanger, T. D. Probability density estimation for the interpretation of neural population codes. J. Neurophysiol. 76, 2790–2793 (1996).
Zhang, K., Ginzburg, I., McNaughton, B. L. & Sejnowski, T. J. Interpreting neuronal population activity by reconstruction: unified framework with application to hippocampal place cells. J. Neurophysiol. 79, 1017–1044 (1998).
Oram, M. W., Földiák, P., Perrett, D. I. & Sengpiel, F. The ‘Ideal Homunculus’: decoding neural population signals. Trends Neurosci. 21, 259–265 (1998).
Seriès, P., Stocker, A. A. & Simoncelli, E. P. Is the homunculus “aware” of sensory adaptation? Neural Comput. 21, 3271–3304 (2009).
Gu, Y., Fetsch, C. R., Adeyemo, B., DeAngelis, G. C. & Angelaki, D. E. Decoding of MSTd population activity accounts for variations in the precision of heading perception. Neuron 66, 596–609 (2010).
Graf, A. B. A., Kohn, A., Jazayeri, M. & Movshon, J. A. Decoding the activity of neuronal populations in macaque primary visual cortex. Nat. Neurosci. 14, 239–245 (2011).
Bays, P. M. Noise in neural populations accounts for errors in working memory. J. Neurosci. 34, 3632–3645 (2014).
Zhang, W. & Luck, S. J. Discrete fixed-resolution representations in visual working memory. Nature 453, 233–235 (2008).
Ma, W. J., Husain, M. & Bays, P. M. Changing concepts of working memory. Nat. Neurosci. 17, 347–356 (2014).
Levy, W. B. & Baxter, R. A. Energy efficient neural codes. Neural Comput. 8, 531–543 (1996).
Laughlin, S. B. Energy as a constraint on the coding and processing of sensory information. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 11, 475–480 (2001).
Balasubramanian, V. & Berry, M. J. A test of metabolically efficient coding in the retina. Network 13, 531–552 (2002).
Ringach, D. L. Population coding under normalization. Vis. Res. 50, 2223–2232 (2010).
Seung, S. H. & Sompolinsky, H. Simple models for reading neuronal population codes. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 90, 10749–10753 (1993).
Wei, X.-X. & Stocker, A. A. Lawful relation between perceptual bias and discriminability. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114, 10244–10249 (2017).
Clarke, B. S. & Barron, A. R. Jeffreys’ prior is asymptotically least favorable under entropy risk. J. Stat. Plan. Inference 41, 37–60 (1994).
Appelle, S. Perception and discrimination as a function of stimulus orientation: the “oblique effect” in man and animals. Psychol. Bull. 78, 266–278 (1972).
Attneave, F. Some informational aspects of visual perception. Psychol. Rev. 61, 183–193 (1954).
Van Hateren, J. H. & van der Schaaf, A. Independent component filters of natural images compared with simple cells in primary visual cortex. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. B Biol. Sci. 265, 359–366 (1998).
Schwartz, O. & Simoncelli, E. P. Natural signal statistics and sensory gain control. Nat. Neurosci. 4, 819–825 (2001).
Lewicki, M. S. Efficient coding of natural sounds. Nat. Neurosci. 5, 356–363 (2002).
Wei, X.-X., Prentice, J. & Balasubramanian, V. A principle of economy predicts the functional architecture of grid cells. eLife 4, e08362 (2015).
Mosheiff, N., Agmon, H., Moriel, A. & Burak, Y. An efficient coding theory for a dynamic trajectory predicts non-uniform allocation of entorhinal grid cells to modules. PLoS Comput. Biol. 13, e1005597 (2017).
Li, V., Michael, E., Balaguer, J., Castañón, S. H. & Summerfield, C. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 115, E8825–E8834 (2018).
Polania, R., Woodford, M. & Ruff, C. C. Efficient coding of subjective value. Nat. Neurosci. 22, 134–142 (2019).
De Valois, R. L., Yund, E. W. & Hepler, N. The orientation and direction selectivity of cells in macaque visual cortex. Vis. Res. 22, 531–544 (1982).
Nover, H., Anderson, C. H. & DeAngelis, G. C. A logarithmic, scale-invariant representation of speed in macaque middle temporal area accounts for speed discrimination performance. J. Neurosci. 25, 10049–10060 (2005).
Stocker, A. A. & Simoncelli, E. P. Visual motion aftereffects arise from a cascade of two isomorphic adaptation mechanisms. J. Vis. 9, 1–14 (2009).
Harvey, C. D., Coen, P. & Tank, D. W. Choice-specific sequences in parietal cortex during a virtual-navigation decision task. Nature 484, 62–68 (2012).
Lebedev, M. A. et al. Analysis of neuronal ensemble activity reveals the pitfalls and shortcomings of rotation dynamics. Sci. Rep. 9, 1–14 (2019).
Michaels, J. A., Dann, B. & Scherberger, H. Neural population dynamics during reaching are better explained by a dynamical system than representational tuning. PLoS Comput. Biol. 12, e1005175 (2016).
DeValois, R. L. & DeValois, K. K. Spatial Vision Vol. 14 (Oxford Univ. Press, 1990).
Nauhaus, I., Nielsen, K. J., Disney, A. A. & Callahan, E. M. Orthogonal micro-organization of orientation and spatial frequency in primate primary visual cortex. Nat. Neurosci. 15, 1683–1690 (2012).
Sclar, G. & Freedman, R. D. Orientation selectivity in the cat’s striate cortex is invariant with stimulus contrast. Exp. Brain Res. 46, 457–461 (1982).
Morrone, M. C., Burr, D. C. & Maffei, L. Functional implications of cross-orientation inhibition of cortical visual cells. I. Neurophysiological evidence. Proc. R. Soc. London. Ser. B. Biol. Sci. 216, 335–354 (1982).
Albrecht, D. G. & Geisler, W. S. Motion selectivity and the contrast-response function of simple cells in the visual cortex. Vis. Neurosci. 7, 531–546 (1991).
Heeger, D. J. Normalization of cell responses in cat striate cortex. Vis. Neurosci. 9, 181–197 (1992).
DeAngelis, G. C., Robson, J. G., Ohzawa, I. & Freedman, R. D. Organization of suppression in receptive fields of neurons in cat visual cortex. J. Neurophysiol. 68, 144–163 (1992).
Sillito, A. M. & Jones, H. E. Context-dependent interactions and visual processing in V1. J. Physiol. 90, 205–209 (1996).
Carandini, M., Movshon, J. A. & Ferster, D. Pattern adaptation and cross-orientation interactions in the primary visual cortex. Neuropharmacology 37, 501–511 (1998).
Carandini, M. & Heeger, D. J. Normalization as a canonical neural computation. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 13, 51–62 (2012).
Tring, E. & Ringach, D. L. On the subspace invariance of population responses. Neurons Behav. Data Analysis Theory https://doi.org/10.1101/361568 (2018).
Averbeck, B. B. & Lee, D. Effects of noise correlations on information encoding and decoding. J. Neurophysiol. 95, 3633–3644 (2006).
Nogueira, R. et al. The effects of population tuning and trial-by-trial variability on information encoding and behavior. J. Neurosci. 40, 1066–1083 (2020).
Hyvärinen, A., Hurri, J. & Hoyer, P. O. Natural Image Statistics: A Probabilistic Approach to Early Computational Vision Vol. 39 (Springer Science & Business Media, 2009).
Rumyantsev, O. I. et al. Fundamental bounds on the fidelity of sensory cortical coding. Nature 580, 100–105 (2020).
Wimmer, K., Nykamp, D. Q., Constantinidis, C. & Compte, A. Bump attractor dynamics in prefrontal cortex explains behavioral precision in spatial working memory. Nat. Neurosci. 17, 431–439 (2014).
Bartolo, R., Saunders, R. C., Mitz, A. R. & Averbeck, B. B. Information-limiting correlations in large neural populations. J. Neurosci. 40, 1668–1678 (2020).
Stringer, C., Pachitariu, M., Steinmetz, N., Carandini, M. & Harris, K. D. High-dimensional geometry of population responses in visual cortex. Nature 571, 361–365 (2019).
Laughlin, S. B., de Ruyter van Steveninck, R. R. & Anderson, J. C. The metabolic cost of neural information. Nat. Neurosci. 1, 36–41 (1998).
Cueva, C. J., Wang, P. Y., Chin, M. & Wei, X.-X. Emergence of Functional and Structural Properties of the Head Direction System by Optimization of Recurrent Neural Networks (ICLR, 2020).
Amari, S.-i Information geometry. Jpn. J. Math. 16, 1–48 (2001).
Bhattacharyya, A. On a measure of divergence between two statistical populations defined by their probability distributions. Bull. Calcutta Math. Soc. 35, 99–109 (1943).
Johnson, D. & Sinanovic, S. Symmetrizing the Kullback–Leibler Distance (IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 2001).
Tenenbaum, J. B., De Silva, V. & Langford, J. C. A global geometric framework for nonlinear dimensionality reduction. Science 290, 2319–2323 (2000).
Roweis, S. T. & Saul, L. K. Nonlinear dimensionality reduction by locally linear embedding. Science 290, 2323–2326 (2000).
Chapin, J. K. & Nicolelis, M. A. L. Principal component analysis of neuronal ensemble activity reveals multidimensional somatosensory representations. J. Neurosci. Methods 94, 121–140 (1999).
Briggman, K. L., Abarbanel, H. D. I. & Kristan, W. B. Optical imaging of neuronal populations during decision-making. Science 307, 896–901 (2005).
Macke, J. H. et al. Empirical models of spiking in neural populations. Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst. 11, 1350–1358 (2011).
Mante, V., Sussillo, D., Shenoy, K. V. & Newsome, W. T. Context-dependent computation by recurrent dynamics in prefrontal cortex. Nature 503, 78–84 (2013).
Sadtler, P. T. et al. Neural constraints on learning. Nature 512, 423–426 (2014).
Pandarinath, C. et al. Inferring single-trial neural population dynamics using sequential auto-encoders. Nat. Methods 15, 805–815 (2018).
Bernardi, S. et al. The geometry of abstraction in the hippocampus and prefrontal cortex. Cell 183, 954–967 (2020).
Singh, G. et al. Topological analysis of population activity in visual cortex. J. Vis. 8 11.1–18 (2008).
Giusti, C., Pastalkova, E., Curto, C. & Itskov, V. Clique topology reveals intrinsic geometric structure in neural correlations. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, 13455–13460 (2015).
Chaudhuri, R., Gercek, B., Pandey, B., Peyrache, A. & Fiete, I. The intrinsic attractor manifold and population dynamics of a canonical cognitive circuit across waking and sleep. Nat. Neurosci. 22, 1512–1520 (2019).
Low, R. J., Lewallen, S., Aronov, D., Nevers, R. & Tank, D. W. Probing variability in a cognitive map using manifold inference from neural dynamics. bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/418939 (2018).
Zhou, D. & Wei, X.-X. Learning identifiable and interpretable latent models of high-dimensional neural activity using pi-VAE. Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst. 33, 7234–7247 (2020).
Langer, M. S. & Bülthoff, H. H. A prior for global convexity in local shape-from-shading. Perception 30, 403–410 (2001).
Weiss, Y., Simoncelli, E. P. & Adelson, E. H. Motion illusions as optimal percepts. Nat. Neurosci. 5, 598–604 (2002).
Adams, W. J., Graf, E. W. & Ernst, M. O. Experience can change the ‘light-from-above’ prior. Nat. Neurosci. 7, 1057–1058 (2004).
Griffiths, T. L. & Tenenbaum, J. B. Optimal predictions in everyday cognition. Psychol. Sci. 17, 767–773 (2006).
Stocker, A. A. & Simoncelli, E. P. Noise characteristics and prior expectations in human visual speed perception. Nat. Neurosci. 9, 578–585 (2006).
Körding, K. P. & Wolpert, D. M. Bayesian decision theory in sensorimotor control. Trends Cognit. Sci. 10, 319–326 (2006).
Gibson, J. J. The ecological approach to visual perception (Psychology Press, 1979).
Shepard, R. N. Ecological constraints on internal representation: resonant kinematics of perceiving, imagining, thinking, and dreaming. Psychol. Rev. 91, 417–447 (1984).
Shepard, R. N. Perceptual-cognitive universals as reflections of the world. Behav. Brain Sci. 24, 581–601 (2001).
Wiskott, L. & Sejnowski, T. J. Slow feature analysis: unsupervised learning of invariances. Neural Comput. 14, 715–770 (2002).
Berkes, P. & Wiskott, L. Slow feature analysis yields a rich repertoire of complex cell properties. J. Vis. 5, 579–602 (2005).
Gärdenfors, P. Conceptual Spaces: The Geometry of Thought (MIT Press, 2004).
Fechner, G. T. Elemente der Psychophysik Vol. 2 (Breitkopf u. Härtel, 1860).
Thurstone, L. L. A law of comparative judgment. Psychol. Rev. 34, 273–286 (1927).
Attneave, F. Dimensions of similarity. Am. J. Psychol. 63, 516–556 (1950).
Ekman, G. Dimensions of color vision. J. Psychol. 38, 467–474 (1954).
Beals, R., Krantz, D. H. & Tversky, A. Foundations of multidimensional scaling. Psychol. Rev. 75, 127–142 (1968).
Shepard, R. N. Attention and the metric structure of the stimulus space. J. Math. Psychol. 1, 54–87 (1964).
Krantz, D. H. & Tversky, A. Similarity of rectangles: an analysis of subjective dimensions. J. Math. Psychol. 12, 4–34 (1975).
Shepard, R. N. Toward a universal law of generalization for psychological science. Science 237, 1317–1323 (1987).
Nosofsky, R. M. Attention, similarity, and the identification–categorization relationship. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 115, 39–61 (1986).
Shepard, R. N. The analysis of proximities: multidimensional scaling with an unknown distance function. Psychometrika 27, 125–140 (1962).
Torgerson, W. S. Multidimensional scaling of similarity. Psychometrika 30, 379–393 (1965).
Tversky, A. Features of similarity. Psychol. Rev. 84, 327–352 (1977).
Shepard, R. N. Multidimensional scaling, tree-fitting, and clustering. Science 210, 390–398 (1980).
Tversky, A. & Gati, I. Similarity, separability, and the triangle inequality. Psychol. Rev. 89, 123–154 (1982).
Ashby, F. G. & Perrin, N. A. Toward a unified theory of similarity and recognition. Psychol. Rev. 95, 124–150 (1988).
Kriegeskorte, N. & Mur, M. Inverse MDS: inferring dissimilarity structure from multiple item arrangements. Front. Psychol. 3, 245 (2012).
Hebart, M., Zheng, C. Y., Pereira, F. & Baker, C. Revealing the multidimensional mental representations of natural objects underlying human similarity judgments. Nat. Hum. Behav. 4, 1173–1185 (2020).
Mur, M. et al. Human object-similarity judgments reflect and transcend the primate-IT object representation. Front. Psychol. 4, 128 (2013).
Cichy, R. M., Kriegeskorte, N., Jozwik, K. M., van den Bosch, J. J. F. & Charest, I. The spatiotemporal neural dynamics underlying perceived similarity for real-world objects. Neuroimage 194, 12–24 (2019).
Golden, J. R., Vilankar, K. P., Wu, M. C. K. & Field, D. J. Conjectures regarding the nonlinear geometry of visual neurons. Vis. Res. 120, 74–92 (2016).
Jazayeri, M. & Afraz, A. Navigating the neural space in search of the neural code. Neuron 93, 1003–1014 (2017).
Zhou, Y., Smith, B. H. & Sharpee, T. O. Hyperbolic geometry of the olfactory space. Sci. Adv. 4, eaaq1458 (2018).
Chung, S. Y., Lee, D. D. & Sompolinsky, H. Classification and geometry of general perceptual manifolds. Phys. Rev. X 8, 031003 (2018).
Sohn, H., Narain, D., Meirhaeghe, N. & Jazayeri, M. Bayesian computation through cortical latent dynamics. Neuron 103, 934–947 (2019).
Hénaff, O. J., Goris, R. L. T. & Simoncelli, E. P. Perceptual straightening of natural videos. Nat. Neurosci. 22, 984–991 (2019).
Okazawa, G., Hatch, C. E., Mancoo, A., Machens, C. K. & Kiani, R. Representational geometry of perceptual decisions in the monkey parietal cortex. Cell 184, 3748–3761 (2021).
Bartlett, M. S. The square root transformation in analysis of variance. Suppl. J. R. Stat. Soc. 3, 68–78 (1936).
Anscombe, F. J. The transformation of Poisson, binomial and negative-binomial data. Biometrika 35, 246–254 (1948).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Both authors contributed equally to all aspects of this work.
Corresponding authors
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Peer review information
Nature Reviews Neuroscience thanks T. Engel, who co-reviewed with C. Langdon, R. Moreno-Bote and D. Ringach for their contribution to the peer review of this work.
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary information
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kriegeskorte, N., Wei, XX. Neural tuning and representational geometry. Nat Rev Neurosci 22, 703–718 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41583-021-00502-3
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41583-021-00502-3
