Visual motion processing and human tracking behavior

The accurate visual tracking of a moving object is a human fundamental skill that allows to reduce the relative slip and instability of the object's image on the retina, thus granting a stable, high-quality vision. In order to optimize tracking performance across time, a quick estimate of the object's global motion properties needs to be fed to the oculomotor system and dynamically updated. Concurrently, performance can be greatly improved in terms of latency and accuracy by taking into account predictive cues, especially under variable conditions of visibility and in presence of ambiguous retinal information. Here, we review several recent studies focusing on the integration of retinal and extra-retinal information for the control of human smooth pursuit.By dynamically probing the tracking performance with well established paradigms in the visual perception and oculomotor literature we provide the basis to test theoretical hypotheses within the framework of dynamic probabilistic inference. We will in particular present the applications of these results in light of state-of-the-art computer vision algorithms

Active inference and oculomotor pursuit: the dynamic causal modelling of eye movements.

This paper introduces a new paradigm that allows one to quantify the Bayesian beliefs evidenced by subjects during oculomotor pursuit. Subjects' eye tracking responses to a partially occluded sinusoidal target were recorded non-invasively and averaged. These response averages were then analysed using dynamic causal modelling (DCM). In DCM, observed responses are modelled using biologically plausible generative or forward models - usually biophysical models of neuronal activity

Optimal anticipatory control as a theory of motor preparation

Supported by a decade of primate electrophysiological experiments, the prevailing theory of neural motor control holds that movement generation is accomplished by a preparatory process that progressively steers the state of the motor cortex into a movement-specific optimal subspace prior to movement onset. The state of the cortex then evolves from these optimal subspaces, producing patterns of neural activity that serve as control inputs to the musculature. This theory, however, does not address the following questions: what characterizes the optimal subspace and what are the neural mechanisms that underlie the preparatory process? We address these questions with a circuit model of movement preparation and control. Specifically, we propose that preparation can be achieved by optimal feedback control (OFC) of the cortical state via a thalamo-cortical loop. Under OFC, the state of the cortex is selectively controlled along state-space directions that have future motor consequences, and not in other inconsequential ones. We show that OFC enables fast movement preparation and explains the observed orthogonality between preparatory and movement-related monkey motor cortex activity. This illustrates the importance of constraining new theories of neural function with experimental data. However, as recording technologies continue to improve, a key challenge is to extract meaningful insights from increasingly large-scale neural recordings. Latent variable models (LVMs) are powerful tools for addressing this challenge due to their ability to identify the low-dimensional latent variables that best explain these large data sets. One shortcoming of most LVMs, however, is that they assume a Euclidean latent space, while many kinematic variables, such as head rotations and the configuration of an arm, are naturally described by variables that live on non-Euclidean latent spaces (e.g., SO(3) and tori). To address this shortcoming, we propose the Manifold Gaussian Process Latent Variable Model, a method for simultaneously inferring nonparametric tuning curves and latent variables on non-Euclidean latent spaces. We show that our method is able to correctly infer the latent ring topology of the fly and mouse head direction circuits.This work was supported by a Trinity-Henry Barlow scholarship and a scholarship from the Ministry of Education, ROC Taiwan

Active Inference, homeostatic regulation and adaptive behavioural control

We review a theory of homeostatic regulation and adaptive behavioural control within the Active Inference framework. Our aim is to connect two research streams that are usually considered independently; namely, Active Inference and associative learning theories of animal behaviour. The former uses a probabilistic (Bayesian) formulation of perception and action, while the latter calls on multiple (Pavlovian, habitual, goal-directed) processes for homeostatic and behavioural control. We offer a synthesis these classical processes and cast them as successive hierarchical contextualisations of sensorimotor constructs, using the generative models that underpin Active Inference. This dissolves any apparent mechanistic distinction between the optimization processes that mediate classical control or learning. Furthermore, we generalize the scope of Active Inference by emphasizing interoceptive inference and homeostatic regulation. The ensuing homeostatic (or allostatic) perspective provides an intuitive explanation for how priors act as drives or goals to enslave action, and emphasises the embodied nature of inference

Active inference, eye movements and oculomotor delays.

This paper considers the problem of sensorimotor delays in the optimal control of (smooth) eye movements under uncertainty. Specifically, we consider delays in the visuo-oculomotor loop and their implications for active inference. Active inference uses a generalisation of Kalman filtering to provide Bayes optimal estimates of hidden states and action in generalised coordinates of motion. Representing hidden states in generalised coordinates provides a simple way of compensating for both sensory and oculomotor delays. The efficacy of this scheme is illustrated using neuronal simulations of pursuit initiation responses, with and without compensation. We then consider an extension of the generative model to simulate smooth pursuit eye movements-in which the visuo-oculomotor system believes both the target and its centre of gaze are attracted to a (hidden) point moving in the visual field. Finally, the generative model is equipped with a hierarchical structure, so that it can recognise and remember unseen (occluded) trajectories and emit anticipatory responses. These simulations speak to a straightforward and neurobiologically plausible solution to the generic problem of integrating information from different sources with different temporal delays and the particular difficulties encountered when a system-like the oculomotor system-tries to control its environment with delayed signals

Anticipatory Semantic Processes

Why anticipatory processes correspond to cognitive abilities of living systems? To be adapted to an environment, behaviors need at least i) internal representations of events occurring in the external environment; and ii) internal anticipations of possible events to occur in the external environment. Interactions of these two opposite but complementary cognitive properties lead to various patterns of experimental data on semantic processing. How to investigate dynamic semantic processes? Experimental studies in cognitive psychology offer several interests such as: i) the control of the semantic environment such as words embedded in sentences; ii) the methodological tools allowing the observation of anticipations and adapted oculomotor behavior during reading; and iii) the analyze of different anticipatory processes within the theoretical framework of semantic processing. What are the different types of semantic anticipations? Experimental data show that semantic anticipatory processes involve i) the coding in memory of sequences of words occurring in textual environments; ii) the anticipation of possible future words from currently perceived words; and iii) the selection of anticipated words as a function of the sequences of perceived words, achieved by anticipatory activations and inhibitory selection processes. How to modelize anticipatory semantic processes? Localist or distributed neural networks models can account for some types of semantic processes, anticipatory or not. Attractor neural networks coding temporal sequences are presented as good candidate for modeling anticipatory semantic processes, according to specific properties of the human brain such as i) auto-associative memory; ii) learning and memorization of sequences of patterns; and iii) anticipation of memorized patterns from previously perceived patterns