Desiderata of evidence for representation in neuroscience

Stephan Pohl,Edgar Y. Walker,David L. Barack,Jennifer Lee,Rachel N. Denison,Ned Block,Florent Meyniel,Wei Ji Ma
2024-03-21
Abstract:This paper develops a systematic framework for the evidence neuroscientists use to establish whether a neural response represents a feature. Researchers try to establish that the neural response is (1) sensitive and (2) specific to the feature, (3) invariant to other features, and (4) functional, which means that it is used downstream in the brain. We formalize these desiderata in information-theoretic terms. This formalism allows us to precisely state the desiderata while unifying the different analysis methods used in neuroscience under one framework. We discuss how common methods such as correlational analyses, decoding and encoding models, representational similarity analysis, and tests of statistical dependence are used to evaluate the desiderata. In doing so, we provide a common terminology to researchers that helps to clarify disagreements, to compare and integrate results across studies and research groups, and to identify when evidence might be missing and when evidence for some representational conclusion is strong. We illustrate the framework with several canonical examples, including the representation of orientation, numerosity, faces, and spatial location. We end by discussing how the framework can be extended to cover models of the neural code, multi-stage models, and other domains.
Neurons and Cognition
What problem does this paper attempt to address?
This paper mainly discusses how to determine whether the patterns of brain activity (neural responses) in neuroscience research represent a specific feature in the environment. The authors propose four ideal criteria (desiderata) to evaluate this evidence: 1) Sensitivity, meaning the neural response is sensitive to changes in the feature; 2) Specificity, indicating that most neural response changes occur only when the feature changes; 3) Invariance, implying that the neural response remains stable for other features; 4) Functionality, suggesting that the neural response carries information about the feature and is useful for downstream cognitive processes, such as triggering behavioral responses. The paper formalizes these four criteria using the quantification method of information theory and provides a unified framework that allows different analysis methods to be discussed in a common language. The authors discuss common analysis techniques, such as correlation analysis, decoding and encoding models, representation similarity analysis, etc., and how to use these techniques to evaluate the desiderata. Several typical examples (e.g., orientation in the visual cortex, numerical representation in the parietal lobe, face recognition in the fusiform face area, and spatial location in the hippocampus) are presented to illustrate the application of these criteria in research practice. Finally, the paper discusses the extension of the framework, including neural encoding models, multi-stage models, and applications in other fields. Overall, this paper aims to clarify the use of representation terms in neuroscience, provide a systematic approach for evaluating evidence, and facilitate the integration and comparison of research findings.