» Articles » PMID: 37451867

Bayesian and Discriminative Models for Active Visual Perception Across Saccades

Overview
Journal eNeuro
Specialty Neurology
Date 2023 Jul 14
PMID 37451867
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The brain interprets sensory inputs to guide behavior, but behavior itself disrupts sensory inputs. Perceiving a coherent world while acting in it constitutes active perception. For example, saccadic eye movements displace visual images on the retina and yet the brain perceives visual stability. Because this percept of visual stability has been shown to be influenced by prior expectations, we tested the hypothesis that it is Bayesian. The key prediction was that priors would be used more as sensory uncertainty increases. Humans and rhesus macaques reported whether an image moved during saccades. We manipulated both prior expectations and levels of sensory uncertainty. All psychophysical data were compared with the predictions of Bayesian ideal observer models. We found that humans were Bayesian for continuous judgments. For categorical judgments, however, they were anti-Bayesian: they used their priors less with greater uncertainty. We studied this categorical result further in macaques. The animals' judgments were similarly anti-Bayesian for sensory uncertainty caused by external, image noise, but Bayesian for uncertainty due to internal, motor-driven noise. A discriminative learning model explained the anti-Bayesian effects. We conclude that active vision uses both Bayesian and discriminative models depending on task requirements (continuous vs categorical) and the source of uncertainty (image noise vs motor-driven noise). In the context of previous knowledge about the saccadic system, our results provide an example of how the comparative analysis of Bayesian versus non-Bayesian models of perception offers novel insights into underlying neural organization.

Citing Articles

A distinct circuit for biasing visual perceptual decisions and modulating superior colliculus activity through the mouse posterior striatum.

Cover K, Elliott K, Preuss S, Krauzlis R bioRxiv. 2024; .

PMID: 39372791 PMC: 11451588. DOI: 10.1101/2024.07.31.605853.

References
1.
Vaziri S, Diedrichsen J, Shadmehr R . Why does the brain predict sensory consequences of oculomotor commands? Optimal integration of the predicted and the actual sensory feedback. J Neurosci. 2006; 26(16):4188-97. PMC: 1473981. DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4747-05.2006. View

2.
Stevenson S, VOLKMANN F, Kelly J, RIGGS L . Dependence of visual suppression on the amplitudes of saccades and blinks. Vision Res. 1986; 26(11):1815-24. DOI: 10.1016/0042-6989(86)90133-1. View

3.
Rao H, Abzug Z, Sommer M . Visual continuity across saccades is influenced by expectations. J Vis. 2016; 16(5):7. DOI: 10.1167/16.5.7. View

4.
Engel S, Glover G, Wandell B . Retinotopic organization in human visual cortex and the spatial precision of functional MRI. Cereb Cortex. 1997; 7(2):181-92. DOI: 10.1093/cercor/7.2.181. View

5.
Feinberg I, Guazzelli M . Schizophrenia--a disorder of the corollary discharge systems that integrate the motor systems of thought with the sensory systems of consciousness. Br J Psychiatry. 1999; 174:196-204. DOI: 10.1192/bjp.174.3.196. View