An Adaptive Neural Mechanism for Acoustic Motion Perception with Varying Sparsity

Overview

Journal Front Neurorobot

Date 2017 Mar 25

PMID 28337137

Authors

Danish Shaikh

Poramate Manoonpong

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Biological motion-sensitive neural circuits are quite adept in perceiving the relative motion of a relevant stimulus. Motion perception is a fundamental ability in neural sensory processing and crucial in target tracking tasks. Tracking a stimulus entails the ability to perceive its motion, i.e., extracting information about its direction and velocity. Here we focus on auditory motion perception of sound stimuli, which is poorly understood as compared to its visual counterpart. In earlier work we have developed a bio-inspired neural learning mechanism for acoustic motion perception. The mechanism extracts directional information via a model of the peripheral auditory system of lizards. The mechanism uses only this directional information obtained via specific motor behaviour to learn the angular velocity of unoccluded sound stimuli in motion. In nature however the stimulus being tracked may be occluded by artefacts in the environment, such as an escaping prey momentarily disappearing behind a cover of trees. This article extends the earlier work by presenting a comparative investigation of auditory motion perception for unoccluded and occluded tonal sound stimuli with a frequency of 2.2 kHz in both simulation and practice. Three instances of each stimulus are employed, differing in their movement velocities-0.5°/time step, 1.0°/time step and 1.5°/time step. To validate the approach in practice, we implement the proposed neural mechanism on a wheeled mobile robot and evaluate its performance in auditory tracking.

References

Aertsen A, Olders J, Johannesma P . Spectro-temporal receptive fields of auditory neurons in the grassfrog. III. Analysis of the stimulus-event relation for natural stimuli. Biol Cybern. 1981; 39(3):195-209. DOI: 10.1007/BF00342772. View

Beitel R . Acoustic pursuit of invisible moving targets by cats. J Acoust Soc Am. 1999; 105(6):3449-53. DOI: 10.1121/1.424671. View

Christensen-Dalsgaard J, Manley G . Directionality of the lizard ear. J Exp Biol. 2005; 208(Pt 6):1209-17. DOI: 10.1242/jeb.01511. View

Barnes G, Asselman P . Pursuit of intermittently illuminated moving targets in the human. J Physiol. 1992; 445:617-37. PMC: 1180001. DOI: 10.1113/jphysiol.1992.sp018943. View

Shaikh D, Hallam J, Christensen-Dalsgaard J . From "ear" to there: a review of biorobotic models of auditory processing in lizards. Biol Cybern. 2016; 110(4-5):303-317. DOI: 10.1007/s00422-016-0701-y. View

Manoonpong P, Geng T, Kulvicius T, Porr B, Worgotter F . Adaptive, fast walking in a biped robot under neuronal control and learning. PLoS Comput Biol. 2007; 3(7):e134. PMC: 1914373. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.0030134. View

Dickinson M . Motor control: how dragonflies catch their prey. Curr Biol. 2015; 25(6):R232-R234. DOI: 10.1016/j.cub.2015.01.046. View

Combes S . Neuroscience: Dragonflies predict and plan their hunts. Nature. 2014; 517(7534):279-80. DOI: 10.1038/nature14078. View

Orban de Xivry J, Missal M, Lefevre P . A dynamic representation of target motion drives predictive smooth pursuit during target blanking. J Vis. 2009; 8(15):6.1-13. DOI: 10.1167/8.15.6. View

10.

Christensen-Dalsgaard J, Tang Y, Carr C . Binaural processing by the gecko auditory periphery. J Neurophysiol. 2011; 105(5):1992-2004. PMC: 3094191. DOI: 10.1152/jn.00004.2011. View

11.

Carlile S, Leung J . The Perception of Auditory Motion. Trends Hear. 2016; 20. PMC: 4871213. DOI: 10.1177/2331216516644254. View

12.

Porr B, Worgotter F . Fast heterosynaptic learning in a robot food retrieval task inspired by the limbic system. Biosystems. 2007; 89(1-3):294-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.biosystems.2006.04.026. View

13.

Cox W, Fischer B . Optimal Prediction of Moving Sound Source Direction in the Owl. PLoS Comput Biol. 2015; 11(7):e1004360. PMC: 4520615. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1004360. View

14.

Witten I, Bergan J, Knudsen E . Dynamic shifts in the owl's auditory space map predict moving sound location. Nat Neurosci. 2006; 9(11):1439-45. DOI: 10.1038/nn1781. View

15.

Churchland M, Chou I, Lisberger S . Evidence for object permanence in the smooth-pursuit eye movements of monkeys. J Neurophysiol. 2003; 90(4):2205-18. PMC: 2581619. DOI: 10.1152/jn.01056.2002. View

16.

Fletcher N, Thwaites S . Physical models for the analysis of acoustical systems in biology. Q Rev Biophys. 1979; 12(1):25-65. DOI: 10.1017/s0033583500002596. View

17.

Marti A, Cobos M, Lopez J, Escolano J . A steered response power iterative method for high-accuracy acoustic source localization. J Acoust Soc Am. 2013; 134(4):2627-30. DOI: 10.1121/1.4820885. View

18.

Wolpert D, Ghahramani Z, Jordan M . An internal model for sensorimotor integration. Science. 1995; 269(5232):1880-2. DOI: 10.1126/science.7569931. View

19.

Nijhawan R, Wu S . Compensating time delays with neural predictions: are predictions sensory or motor?. Philos Trans A Math Phys Eng Sci. 2009; 367(1891):1063-78. DOI: 10.1098/rsta.2008.0270. View

20.

Porr B, Worgotter F . Strongly improved stability and faster convergence of temporal sequence learning by using input correlations only. Neural Comput. 2006; 18(6):1380-412. DOI: 10.1162/neco.2006.18.6.1380. View