-
Same Cause; Different Effects in the Brain
Authors:
Mariya Toneva,
Jennifer Williams,
Anand Bollu,
Christoph Dann,
Leila Wehbe
Abstract:
To study information processing in the brain, neuroscientists manipulate experimental stimuli while recording participant brain activity. They can then use encoding models to find out which brain "zone" (e.g. which region of interest, volume pixel or electrophysiology sensor) is predicted from the stimulus properties. Given the assumptions underlying this setup, when stimulus properties are predic…
▽ More
To study information processing in the brain, neuroscientists manipulate experimental stimuli while recording participant brain activity. They can then use encoding models to find out which brain "zone" (e.g. which region of interest, volume pixel or electrophysiology sensor) is predicted from the stimulus properties. Given the assumptions underlying this setup, when stimulus properties are predictive of the activity in a zone, these properties are understood to cause activity in that zone.
In recent years, researchers have used neural networks to construct representations that capture the diverse properties of complex stimuli, such as natural language or natural images. Encoding models built using these high-dimensional representations are often able to significantly predict the activity in large swathes of cortex, suggesting that the activity in all these brain zones is caused by stimulus properties captured in the representation. It is then natural to ask: "Is the activity in these different brain zones caused by the stimulus properties in the same way?" In neuroscientific terms, this corresponds to asking if these different zones process the stimulus properties in the same way.
Here, we propose a new framework that enables researchers to ask if the properties of a stimulus affect two brain zones in the same way. We use simulated data and two real fMRI datasets with complex naturalistic stimuli to show that our framework enables us to make such inferences. Our inferences are strikingly consistent between the two datasets, indicating that the proposed framework is a promising new tool for neuroscientists to understand how information is processed in the brain.
△ Less
Submitted 21 February, 2022;
originally announced February 2022.
-
NIPS 2016 Workshop on Representation Learning in Artificial and Biological Neural Networks (MLINI 2016)
Authors:
Leila Wehbe,
Anwar Nunez-Elizalde,
Marcel van Gerven,
Irina Rish,
Brian Murphy,
Moritz Grosse-Wentrup,
Georg Langs,
Guillermo Cecchi
Abstract:
This workshop explores the interface between cognitive neuroscience and recent advances in AI fields that aim to reproduce human performance such as natural language processing and computer vision, and specifically deep learning approaches to such problems.
When studying the cognitive capabilities of the brain, scientists follow a system identification approach in which they present different st…
▽ More
This workshop explores the interface between cognitive neuroscience and recent advances in AI fields that aim to reproduce human performance such as natural language processing and computer vision, and specifically deep learning approaches to such problems.
When studying the cognitive capabilities of the brain, scientists follow a system identification approach in which they present different stimuli to the subjects and try to model the response that different brain areas have of that stimulus. The goal is to understand the brain by trying to find the function that expresses the activity of brain areas in terms of different properties of the stimulus. Experimental stimuli are becoming increasingly complex with more and more people being interested in studying real life phenomena such as the perception of natural images or natural sentences. There is therefore a need for a rich and adequate vector representation of the properties of the stimulus, that we can obtain using advances in machine learning.
In parallel, new ML approaches, many of which in deep learning, are inspired to a certain extent by human behavior or biological principles. Neural networks for example were originally inspired by biological neurons. More recently, processes such as attention are being used which have are inspired by human behavior. However, the large bulk of these methods are independent of findings about brain function, and it is unclear whether it is at all beneficial for machine learning to try to emulate brain function in order to achieve the same tasks that the brain achieves.
△ Less
Submitted 10 April, 2017; v1 submitted 6 January, 2017;
originally announced January 2017.
-
Proceedings of the 5th Workshop on Machine Learning and Interpretation in Neuroimaging (MLINI) at NIPS 2015
Authors:
I. Rish,
L. Wehbe,
G. Langs,
M. Grosse-Wentrup,
B. Murphy,
G. Cecchi
Abstract:
This volume is a collection of contributions from the 5th Workshop on Machine Learning and Interpretation in Neuroimaging (MLINI) at the Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS 2015) conference. Modern multivariate statistical methods developed in the rapidly growing field of machine learning are being increasingly applied to various problems in neuroimaging, from cognitive state detection to…
▽ More
This volume is a collection of contributions from the 5th Workshop on Machine Learning and Interpretation in Neuroimaging (MLINI) at the Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS 2015) conference. Modern multivariate statistical methods developed in the rapidly growing field of machine learning are being increasingly applied to various problems in neuroimaging, from cognitive state detection to clinical diagnosis and prognosis. Multivariate pattern analysis methods are designed to examine complex relationships between high-dimensional signals, such as brain images, and outcomes of interest, such as the category of a stimulus, a type of a mental state of a subject, or a specific mental disorder. Such techniques are in contrast with the traditional mass-univariate approaches that dominated neuroimaging in the past and treated each individual imaging measurement in isolation.
We believe that machine learning has a prominent role in shaping how questions in neuroscience are framed, and that the machine-learning mind set is now entering modern psychology and behavioral studies. It is also equally important that practical applications in these fields motivate a rapidly evolving line or research in the machine learning community. In parallel, there is an intense interest in learning more about brain function in the context of rich naturalistic environments and scenes. Efforts to go beyond highly specific paradigms that pinpoint a single function, towards schemes for measuring the interaction with natural and more varied scene are made. The goal of the workshop is to pinpoint the most pressing issues and common challenges across the neuroscience, neuroimaging, psychology and machine learning fields, and to sketch future directions and open questions in the light of novel methodology.
△ Less
Submitted 14 May, 2016;
originally announced May 2016.
-
Nonparametric Independence Testing for Small Sample Sizes
Authors:
Aaditya Ramdas,
Leila Wehbe
Abstract:
This paper deals with the problem of nonparametric independence testing, a fundamental decision-theoretic problem that asks if two arbitrary (possibly multivariate) random variables $X,Y$ are independent or not, a question that comes up in many fields like causality and neuroscience. While quantities like correlation of $X,Y$ only test for (univariate) linear independence, natural alternatives lik…
▽ More
This paper deals with the problem of nonparametric independence testing, a fundamental decision-theoretic problem that asks if two arbitrary (possibly multivariate) random variables $X,Y$ are independent or not, a question that comes up in many fields like causality and neuroscience. While quantities like correlation of $X,Y$ only test for (univariate) linear independence, natural alternatives like mutual information of $X,Y$ are hard to estimate due to a serious curse of dimensionality. A recent approach, avoiding both issues, estimates norms of an \textit{operator} in Reproducing Kernel Hilbert Spaces (RKHSs). Our main contribution is strong empirical evidence that by employing \textit{shrunk} operators when the sample size is small, one can attain an improvement in power at low false positive rates. We analyze the effects of Stein shrinkage on a popular test statistic called HSIC (Hilbert-Schmidt Independence Criterion). Our observations provide insights into two recently proposed shrinkage estimators, SCOSE and FCOSE - we prove that SCOSE is (essentially) the optimal linear shrinkage method for \textit{estimating} the true operator; however, the non-linearly shrunk FCOSE usually achieves greater improvements in \textit{test power}. This work is important for more powerful nonparametric detection of subtle nonlinear dependencies for small samples.
△ Less
Submitted 2 September, 2015; v1 submitted 7 June, 2014;
originally announced June 2014.
-
Regularized brain reading with shrinkage and smoothing
Authors:
Leila Wehbe,
Aaditya Ramdas,
Rebecca C. Steorts,
Cosma Rohilla Shalizi
Abstract:
Functional neuroimaging measures how the brain responds to complex stimuli. However, sample sizes are modest, noise is substantial, and stimuli are high dimensional. Hence, direct estimates are inherently imprecise and call for regularization. We compare a suite of approaches which regularize via shrinkage: ridge regression, the elastic net (a generalization of ridge regression and the lasso), and…
▽ More
Functional neuroimaging measures how the brain responds to complex stimuli. However, sample sizes are modest, noise is substantial, and stimuli are high dimensional. Hence, direct estimates are inherently imprecise and call for regularization. We compare a suite of approaches which regularize via shrinkage: ridge regression, the elastic net (a generalization of ridge regression and the lasso), and a hierarchical Bayesian model based on small area estimation (SAE). We contrast regularization with spatial smoothing and combinations of smoothing and shrinkage. All methods are tested on functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data from multiple subjects participating in two different experiments related to reading, for both predicting neural response to stimuli and decoding stimuli from responses. Interestingly, when the regularization parameters are chosen by cross-validation independently for every voxel, low/high regularization is chosen in voxels where the classification accuracy is high/low, indicating that the regularization intensity is a good tool for identification of relevant voxels for the cognitive task. Surprisingly, all the regularization methods work about equally well, suggesting that beating basic smoothing and shrinkage will take not only clever methods, but also careful modeling.
△ Less
Submitted 4 February, 2016; v1 submitted 25 January, 2014;
originally announced January 2014.
