N 400 amplitudes as change in a probabilistic representation of meaning : A neural network model

The N400 component of the event-related brain potential has aroused much interest because it is thought to provide an online measure of meaning processing in the brain. Yet, the underlying process of meaning construction remains incompletely understood. Here, we present a computationally explicit account of this process and the emerging representation of sentence meaning. We simulate N400 amplitudes as the change induced by an incoming stimulus in an implicit and probabilistic representation of meaning captured by the hidden unit activation pattern in a neural network model of sentence comprehension, and propose that the process underlying the N400 also drives implicit learning in the network. We account for a broad range of empirically observed N400 effects which have previously been difficult to capture within a single integrated framework.

[1]  D. Caplan,et al.  Electrophysiological distinctions in processing conceptual relationships within simple sentences. , 2003, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[2]  M. Koivisto,et al.  Cognitive representations underlying the N400 priming effect. , 2001, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[3]  Bobby D. Bryant and Risto Miikkulainen From Word Stream To Gestalt: A Direct Semantic Parse For Complex Sentences , 2001 .

[4]  James L. McClelland,et al.  The parallel distributed processing approach to semantic cognition , 2003, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[5]  Geoffrey E. Hinton Connectionist Learning Procedures , 1989, Artif. Intell..

[6]  Steven A. Hillyard,et al.  Brain Potentials Reflect Semantic Incongruity , 2007 .

[7]  M. Kutas,et al.  The N400 in a semantic categorization task across 6 decades. , 1998, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[8]  Milena Rabovsky,et al.  Simulating the N400 ERP component as semantic network error: Insights from a feature-based connectionist attractor model of word meaning , 2014, Cognition.

[9]  Richard S. Sutton,et al.  Reinforcement Learning: An Introduction , 1998, IEEE Trans. Neural Networks.

[10]  L. Osterhout,et al.  Neural correlates of second-language word learning: minimal instruction produces rapid change , 2004, Nature Neuroscience.

[11]  Colin J Davis,et al.  Evidence from masked-priming that initial identification of brand names is via abstract letter identities. , 2019, British journal of psychology.

[12]  A. Friederici Towards a neural basis of auditory sentence processing , 2002, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[13]  Peter M. Todd,et al.  Learning and connectionist representations , 1993 .

[14]  D. Plaut,et al.  A neurally plausible Parallel Distributed Processing model of Event-Related Potential word reading data , 2012, Brain and Language.

[15]  Stewart M. McCauley,et al.  Evidence from Event-related Brain Potentials Perception and Bias in the Processing of Compound versus Phrasal Stress : , 2013 .

[16]  Jeffrey Pennington,et al.  GloVe: Global Vectors for Word Representation , 2014, EMNLP.

[17]  Ellen F. Lau,et al.  A cortical network for semantics: (de)constructing the N400 , 2008, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[18]  James L. McClelland,et al.  A parallel distributed processing approach to automaticity. , 1992, The American journal of psychology.

[19]  M. Kutas,et al.  Brain potentials during reading reflect word expectancy and semantic association , 1984, Nature.

[20]  M. Rugg The effects of semantic priming and work repetition on event-related potentials. , 1985, Psychophysiology.

[21]  S. Frank,et al.  The ERP response to the amount of information conveyed by words in sentences , 2015, Brain and Language.

[22]  H. Heinze,et al.  Perceptual Priming Versus Explicit Memory: Dissociable Neural Correlates at Encoding , 2002, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[23]  J. Debruille,et al.  The N400 potential could index a semantic inhibition , 2007, Brain Research Reviews.

[24]  James L. McClelland,et al.  A Parallel Distributed Processing Perspective , 1994 .

[25]  M. Kutas,et al.  An Event-Related Potential (ERP) Analysis of Semantic Congruity and Repetition Effects in Sentences , 1992, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[26]  Kara D. Federmeier,et al.  Chapter 1 Time for Meaning: Electrophysiology Provides Insights into the Dynamics of Representation and Processing in Semantic Memory , 2009 .

[27]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  A theory of cortical responses , 2005, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[28]  R. Levy Expectation-based syntactic comprehension , 2008, Cognition.

[29]  M. Kutas,et al.  Influences of semantic and syntactic context on open- and closed-class words , 1991, Memory & cognition.

[30]  A. Jongman,et al.  A comparison of semantic and syntactic event related potentials generated by children and adults , 2006, Brain and Language.

[31]  David C. Plaut,et al.  A connectionist model of sentence comprehension and production , 2002 .

[32]  S. Gotts Incremental learning of perceptual and conceptual representations and the puzzle of neural repetition suppression , 2016, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[33]  Bruce D. McCandliss,et al.  The visual word form area: expertise for reading in the fusiform gyrus , 2003, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[34]  Geoffrey E. Hinton Learning and Applying Contextual Constraints in Sentence Comprehension , 1991 .