You are currently browsing the thoughts on thoughts weblog archives for the day 02/06/2010.
M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
« May | Jul » | |||||
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | |
7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 |
14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 |
21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 |
28 | 29 | 30 |
- 04/01/2011: Alien hand
- 01/01/2011: Decline effect
- 29/12/2010: Improving scan results
- 26/12/2010: Probable, true or truthy
- 23/12/2010: The noisy brain
- 20/12/2010: Blog answers
- 16/12/2010: Why is science talking about freewill?
- 14/12/2010: The many faces of Bayesian models
- 11/12/2010: Motor bias
- 08/12/2010: Embodied metaphor
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
Archive for 02/06/2010
Making and testing predictions
02/06/2010 by admin.
Dana site has a piece by Kayt Sukel, ‘Does the brain use the Scientific Method?’ (here) It reports on the work of A. Alink and group on predictive feedback in the brain.
The idea of a “little scientist” inside in our heads making and testing predictions is not a new one… How are human beings able to suss out the environment around them so quickly and efficiently? One idea is that our brains are forming predictions from the top down. That is, we use data from our past experiences to help cull all the extraneous sensory data that is flowing in from the environment. Neuroanatomy seems to support this idea… “We believe that the brain actually constantly has some kind of expectation about what will happen next,” says Alink. “Sensory input provides information about whether those predictions are correct.”… “Everywhere you look in the brain, almost every connection you see has one going in the other direction, too,” says Moshe Bar, a neuroscientist at Harvard Medical School. “The more we thought about this anatomical set-up, the more it seemed like there must be some kind of feedback happening.”… “As the stimulus becomes less predictable, we’d expect the signal in the brain to increase. And as it becomes more and more predictable, the activation should systematically reduce,” says Alink. “That’s what we found. With the least predictable stimuli, we saw the highest response in V1. In the most predictable, the lowest. And in between the two, an intermediate level of activation. It seems that our brain works hard to hypothesize and then test what’s going to happen next.”
This group is studying prediction with the hope of understanding depression. They theorize that faults in the prediction mechanism may be a cause of depression and more serious conditions.
Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment »