The inversion of sensory processing by feedback pathways: a model of visual cognitive functions.

The mammalian visual system has a hierarchic structure with extensive reciprocal connections. A model is proposed in which the feedback pathways serve to modify afferent sensory stimuli in ways that enhance and complete sensory input patterns, suppress irrelevant features, and generate quasi-sensory patterns when afferent stimulation is weak or absent. Such inversion of sensory coding and feature extraction can be achieved by optimization processes in which scalar responses derived from high-level neural analyzers are used as cost functions to modify the filter properties of more peripheral sensory relays. An optimization algorithm, Alopex, which is used in the model, is readily implemented with known neural circuitry. The functioning of the system is investigated by computer simulations.

[1]  W. Singer,et al.  The effect of reticular stimulation on spontaneous and evoked activity in the cat visual cortex , 1976, Brain Research.

[2]  G L Shaw,et al.  Model of cortical organization embodying a basis for a theory of information processing and memory recall. , 1985, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[3]  L. F. Kromer,et al.  A study of the organization of the locus coeruleus projections to the lateral geniculate nuclei in the albino rat , 1980, Neuroscience.

[4]  W Singer,et al.  Control of thalamic transmission by corticofugal and ascending reticular pathways in the visual system. , 1977, Physiological reviews.

[5]  J. Lund,et al.  The origin of efferent pathways from the primary visual cortex, area 17, of the macaque monkey as shown by retrograde transport of horseradish peroxidase , 1975, The Journal of comparative neurology.

[6]  E Harth,et al.  Alopex: a stochastic method for determining visual receptive fields. , 1974, Vision research.

[7]  C. D. Gelatt,et al.  Optimization by Simulated Annealing , 1983, Science.

[8]  E. Harth,et al.  Brainstem control of sensory information: a mechanism for perception. , 1985, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[9]  N. Metropolis,et al.  Equation of State Calculations by Fast Computing Machines , 1953, Resonance.

[10]  E. Harth.  Visual perception: A dynamic theory , 2004, Biological Cybernetics.

[11]  G. Ahlsén,et al.  Projection of brain stem neurons to the perigeniculate nucleus and the lateral geniculate nucleus in the cat , 1982, Brain Research.

[12]  K. Rockland,et al.  Cortical connections of the occipital lobe in the rhesus monkey: Interconnections between areas 17, 18, 19 and the superior temporal sulcus , 1981, Brain Research.

[13]  L. T. Wille,et al.  Searching potential energy surfaces by simulated annealing , 1986, Nature.

[14]  D H HUBEL,et al.  RECEPTIVE FIELDS AND FUNCTIONAL ARCHITECTURE IN TWO NONSTRIATE VISUAL AREAS (18 AND 19) OF THE CAT. , 1965, Journal of neurophysiology.

[15]  J. Hopfield,et al.  Computing with neural circuits: a model. , 1986, Science.

[16]  E. Harth,et al.  The Alopex process: Visual receptive fields by response feedback , 1979, Biological Cybernetics.

[17]  Edward L. White,et al.  Thalamocortical synapses with corticothalamic projection neurons in mouse SmI cortex: Electron microscopic demonstration of a monosynaptic feedback loop , 1981, Neuroscience Letters.

[18]  H. C. Hughes,et al.  Brainstem afferents to the lateral geniculate nucleus of the cat , 2004, Experimental Brain Research.

[19]  L. Ide,et al.  The fine structure of the perigeniculate nucleus in the cat , 1982, The Journal of comparative neurology.