Sunday, 5 November 2017

How neurons use crowdsourcing to make decisions


How neurons use crowdsourcing to make decisions
How do we make decisions? Or rather, how do our neurons make decisions for us? Do individual neurons have a strong say or is the voice in the neural collective?

One way to think about this question is to ask how many of my neurons you would have to observe to read my mind. If you can predict I am about to say the word “grandma” by watching one of my neurons then we could say our decisions can be attributed to single, perhaps “very vocal,” neurons. In neuroscience such neurons are called “grandmother” neurons after it was proposed in the 1960’s that there may be single neurons that uniquely respond to complex and important percepts like a grandmother’s face.

On the other hand, if you can only read my mind by polling many of my neurons then it would appear the decision a collective one, distributed across hundreds, thousands, or even millions of neurons. A big debate in neuroscience is whether single-neuron encoding or distributed encoding is most relevant for understanding how the brain functions.

In fact, both may be right. In research recently published in Frontiers in Neuroscience, Bryan Daniels, Jessica Flack, and David Krakauer tackle this problem using data recorded from the neurons of a macaque monkey tasked by the experimenter with making a simple decision.

In an area of the brain involved in the decision-making process, Daniels and colleagues find that as the monkey initially processes the data, polling many neurons is required to get a good prediction of the monkey’s decision. Then, as the time for committing to a decision approaches, this pattern shifts. The neurons start to agree and eventually each one on its own is maximally predictive. Hence at first the “neural voice” is heterogeneous and collective, but as the neurons get close to the decision point, the “neural voice” becomes homogenous and, in a sense, individualistic, as any neuron on its own is sufficient to read the monkey’s mind.

Daniels says a possible explanation for this odd behavior is that the system has two tasks to solve. It must gather good information from noisy data and it must use this information to produce a coherent decision. To find regularities in the input it polls many individual neurons, as the crowd’s answer is more reliable than any single neuron’s when the data are noisy. But, as Krakauer says, ultimately a decision has to be made. The neurons agree on an answer by sharing their information to come to a consensus.

This explanation echoes results in other collective systems, from animal societies to systems studied in statistical physics. Flack says this commonality suggests a general principle of collective computation: It has two phases — an information accumulation phase that uses crowdsourcing to collect reliable information and a consensus phase that allows the system to act.

Source & further reading:
https://www.santafe.edu/news-center/news/how-neurons-use-crowdsourcing-make-decisions

Journal article:
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnins.2017.00313/full

#decisionmaking #neurons #grandmothercell #neuroscience #research

5 comments:

  1. I wonder if neurons, like humans are also prone to decisions which do not benefit the collective, but only a subset? Kind of like 'neuro-politics', the taste, smell, vision, emotion etc neurons grouping together to favour themselves.

    Perhaps not all neurons are equal, depending on the situation, so some like the amygdala neurons having more influence over a persons actions during periods of perceived threats or uncertainties, which can lead to negative consequences - conflict, wars and so on

    ReplyDelete
  2. Sam Collett As usual, your interventions raise a lot of odd questions... You must take in account the life span of a neuron... Does he know that he will die eventually, can he transmit his knowledge and his behavior to his sons?
    If not, why do a single neuron would mind of his own benefit?
    Does the neuron community has a spiritual leader, any psychologist among them, any God? 😀

    ReplyDelete
  3. Isn't time but an invention of humans to give meaning or reason for the entropy of our existence? For a neuron, an atom, a solar system, the galaxy and the universe a 'short' or 'long' time is different. Perhaps we are but an experiment for an extradimensional being, playing with our neurons?

    Sometimes the strangest of questions can trigger other kinds of questions and deeper understanding. Or maybe just make some go 'huh?' or 'ummm'

    ReplyDelete
  4. Sam Collett​ you understood of course that i was teasing you a little bit with my comment, these questions are so open that we can smile and joke about the meaning of life 😀

    ReplyDelete
  5. Brings 'inside out' to mind, or 'the numskulls' (British comic 'The Beano'), influencing our thoughts. Or, if your name is Homer Simpson, two monkeys grooming

    ReplyDelete