3 resultados para synchronous HMM
em Université de Lausanne, Switzerland
Resumo:
Among the largest resources for biological sequence data is the large amount of expressed sequence tags (ESTs) available in public and proprietary databases. ESTs provide information on transcripts but for technical reasons they often contain sequencing errors. Therefore, when analyzing EST sequences computationally, such errors must be taken into account. Earlier attempts to model error prone coding regions have shown good performance in detecting and predicting these while correcting sequencing errors using codon usage frequencies. In the research presented here, we improve the detection of translation start and stop sites by integrating a more complex mRNA model with codon usage bias based error correction into one hidden Markov model (HMM), thus generalizing this error correction approach to more complex HMMs. We show that our method maintains the performance in detecting coding sequences.
Resumo:
Multisensory stimuli can improve performance, facilitating RTs on sensorimotor tasks. This benefit is referred to as the redundant signals effect (RSE) and can exceed predictions on the basis of probability summation, indicative of integrative processes. Although an RSE exceeding probability summation has been repeatedly observed in humans and nonprimate animals, there are scant and inconsistent data from nonhuman primates performing similar protocols. Rather, existing paradigms have instead focused on saccadic eye movements. Moreover, the extant results in monkeys leave unresolved how stimulus synchronicity and intensity impact performance. Two trained monkeys performed a simple detection task involving arm movements to auditory, visual, or synchronous auditory-visual multisensory pairs. RSEs in excess of predictions on the basis of probability summation were observed and thus forcibly follow from neural response interactions. Parametric variation of auditory stimulus intensity revealed that in both animals, RT facilitation was limited to situations where the auditory stimulus intensity was below or up to 20 dB above perceptual threshold, despite the visual stimulus always being suprathreshold. No RT facilitation or even behavioral costs were obtained with auditory intensities 30-40 dB above threshold. The present study demonstrates the feasibility and the suitability of behaving monkeys for investigating links between psychophysical and neurophysiologic instantiations of multisensory interactions.
Resumo:
The ability to discriminate conspecific vocalizations is observed across species and early during development. However, its neurophysiologic mechanism remains controversial, particularly regarding whether it involves specialized processes with dedicated neural machinery. We identified spatiotemporal brain mechanisms for conspecific vocalization discrimination in humans by applying electrical neuroimaging analyses to auditory evoked potentials (AEPs) in response to acoustically and psychophysically controlled nonverbal human and animal vocalizations as well as sounds of man-made objects. AEP strength modulations in the absence of topographic modulations are suggestive of statistically indistinguishable brain networks. First, responses were significantly stronger, but topographically indistinguishable to human versus animal vocalizations starting at 169-219 ms after stimulus onset and within regions of the right superior temporal sulcus and superior temporal gyrus. This effect correlated with another AEP strength modulation occurring at 291-357 ms that was localized within the left inferior prefrontal and precentral gyri. Temporally segregated and spatially distributed stages of vocalization discrimination are thus functionally coupled and demonstrate how conventional views of functional specialization must incorporate network dynamics. Second, vocalization discrimination is not subject to facilitated processing in time, but instead lags more general categorization by approximately 100 ms, indicative of hierarchical processing during object discrimination. Third, although differences between human and animal vocalizations persisted when analyses were performed at a single-object level or extended to include additional (man-made) sound categories, at no latency were responses to human vocalizations stronger than those to all other categories. Vocalization discrimination transpires at times synchronous with that of face discrimination but is not functionally specialized.