Neural Dynamics of Saccadic and Smooth Pursuit Eye Movement Coordination during Visual Tracking of Unpredictably Moving Targets

How does the brain use eye movements to track objects that move in unpredictable directions and speeds? Saccadic eye movements rapidly foveate peripheral visual or auditory targets and smooth pursuit eye movements keep the fovea pointed toward an attended moving target. Analyses of tracking data in monkeys and humans reveal systematic deviations from predictions of the simplest model of saccade-pursuit interactions, which would use no interactions other than common target selection and recruitment of shared motoneurons. Instead, saccadic and smooth pursuit movements cooperate to cancel errors of gaze position and velocity, and thus to maximize target visibility through time. How are these two systems coordinated to promote visual localization and identification of moving targets? How are saccades calibrated to correctly foveate a target despite its continued motion during the saccade? A neural model proposes answers to such questions. The modeled interactions encompass motion processing areas MT, MST, FPA, DLPN and NRTP; saccade planning and execution areas FEF and SC; the saccadic generator in the brain stem; and the cerebellum. Simulations illustrate the model’s ability to functionally explain and quantitatively simulate anatomical, neurophysiological and behavioral data about SAC-SPEM tracking.

Target Selection by Frontal Cortex During Coordinated Saccadic and Smooth Pursuit Eye Movement

Oculomotor tracking of moving objects is an important component of visually based cognition and planning. Such tracking is achieved by a combination of saccades and smooth pursuit eye movements. In particular, the saccadic and smooth pursuit systems interact to often choose the same target, and to maximize its visibility through time. How do multiple brain regions interact, including frontal cortical areas, to decide the choice of a target among several competing moving stimuli? How is target selection information that is created by a bias (e.g., electrical stimulation) transferred from one movement system to another? These saccade-pursuit interactions are clarified by a new computational neural model, which describes interactions among motion processing areas MT, MST, FPA, DLPN; saccade specification, selection, and planning areas LIP, FEF, SNr, SC; the saccadic generator in the brain stem; and the cerebellum. Model simulations explain a broad range of neuroanatomical and neurophysiological data. These results are in contrast with the simplest parallel model with no interactions between saccades and pursuit than common-target selection and recruitment of shared motoneurons. Actual tracking episodes in primates reveal multiple systematic deviations from predictions of the simplest parallel model, which are explained by the current model.

Form Perception

National Science Foundation (SBE-0354378); Office of Naval Research (N00014-01-1-0624)

Dopaminergic and Non-Dopaminergic Value Systems in Conditioning and Outcome-Specific Revaluation

Animals are motivated to choose environmental options that can best satisfy current needs. To explain such choices, this paper introduces the MOTIVATOR (Matching Objects To Internal Values Triggers Option Revaluations) neural model. MOTIVATOR describes cognitiveemotional interactions between higher-order sensory cortices and an evaluative neuraxis composed of the hypothalamus, amygdala, and orbitofrontal cortex. Given a conditioned stimulus (CS), the model amygdala and lateral hypothalamus interact to calculate the expected current value of the subjective outcome that the CS predicts, constrained by the current state of deprivation or satiation. The amygdala relays the expected value information to orbitofrontal cells that receive inputs from anterior inferotemporal cells, and medial orbitofrontal cells that receive inputs from rhinal cortex. The activations of these orbitofrontal cells code the subjective values of objects. These values guide behavioral choices. The model basal ganglia detect errors in CS-specific predictions of the value and timing of rewards. Excitatory inputs from the pedunculopontine nucleus interact with timed inhibitory inputs from model striosomes in the ventral striatum to regulate dopamine burst and dip responses from cells in the substantia nigra pars compacta and ventral tegmental area. Learning in cortical and striatal regions is strongly modulated by dopamine. The model is used to address tasks that examine food-specific satiety, Pavlovian conditioning, reinforcer devaluation, and simultaneous visual discrimination. Model simulations successfully reproduce discharge dynamics of known cell types, including signals that predict saccadic reaction times and CS-dependent changes in systolic blood pressure.

Speaker Normalization Using Cortical Strip Maps: A Neural Model for Steady State Vowel Identification

Auditory signals of speech are speaker-dependent, but representations of language meaning are speaker-independent. Such a transformation enables speech to be understood from different speakers. A neural model is presented that performs speaker normalization to generate a pitchindependent representation of speech sounds, while also preserving information about speaker identity. This speaker-invariant representation is categorized into unitized speech items, which input to sequential working memories whose distributed patterns can be categorized, or chunked, into syllable and word representations. The proposed model fits into an emerging model of auditory streaming and speech categorization. The auditory streaming and speaker normalization parts of the model both use multiple strip representations and asymmetric competitive circuits, thereby suggesting that these two circuits arose from similar neural designs. The normalized speech items are rapidly categorized and stably remembered by Adaptive Resonance Theory circuits. Simulations use synthesized steady-state vowels from the Peterson and Barney [J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 24, 175-184 (1952)] vowel database and achieve accuracy rates similar to those achieved by human listeners. These results are compared to behavioral data and other speaker normalization models.