* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Nature template
Neuroethology wikipedia , lookup
Cortical cooling wikipedia , lookup
Clinical neurochemistry wikipedia , lookup
Electrophysiology wikipedia , lookup
Mirror neuron wikipedia , lookup
Neuroanatomy wikipedia , lookup
Multielectrode array wikipedia , lookup
Artificial neural network wikipedia , lookup
Central pattern generator wikipedia , lookup
Neuroeconomics wikipedia , lookup
Convolutional neural network wikipedia , lookup
Biological neuron model wikipedia , lookup
Recurrent neural network wikipedia , lookup
Premovement neuronal activity wikipedia , lookup
Pre-Bötzinger complex wikipedia , lookup
Neural engineering wikipedia , lookup
Single-unit recording wikipedia , lookup
Feature detection (nervous system) wikipedia , lookup
Neural correlates of consciousness wikipedia , lookup
Neural oscillation wikipedia , lookup
Metastability in the brain wikipedia , lookup
Synaptic gating wikipedia , lookup
Types of artificial neural networks wikipedia , lookup
Neuropsychopharmacology wikipedia , lookup
Optogenetics wikipedia , lookup
Channelrhodopsin wikipedia , lookup
Development of the nervous system wikipedia , lookup
Efficient coding hypothesis wikipedia , lookup
1 Neurons of the cerebral cortex exhibit precise inter spike timing in correspondence to behavior Tomer Shmiel [1] , Rotem Drori [2] , Oren Shmiel [1] , Yoram Ben-Shaul [2] , Zoltan Nadasdy [3] , Mina Teicher [1] & Moshe Abeles [1,2] [1] Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan 52900, Israel [2] Hebrew University, Jerusalem 91120, Israel [3] California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, 91125, USA Abstract We show that times of spikes can be very precise! In the cerebral cortex, where each nerve cell is affected by thousands of others (1, 2), it is the common belief that the exact time of a spike is random up to an averaged firing rate over tens of milliseconds (3). In a brain slice, precise time relations of several neurons have been observed (4). It remained unclear whether this phenomenon can also be observed in brains of behaving animals. Here we show, in behaving monkeys, that time intervals between spikes, measured in correspondence to a specific behavior, may be controlled to within 3 milliseconds. 1) Introduction As known, most nerve cells in the brain communicate with each other by standard pulses called action potentials (or spikes). The common belief, so far, is that each neuron represents one aspect of the mental processes not by precise firing time, but by elevating its firing rate (3). However, if time relations among different neurons could be precisely 2 controlled and read out, complex representations could be built from simpler ones efficiently and very fast (5-7). In a brain slice, precise time relations among several neurons have been observed (4). Could this phenomenon be also observed in brains of behaving animals? We use here data-mining techniques and rigorous statistic testing to test how precise are time intervals between spikes of different neurons. We show, in behaving monkeys, that when time intervals between spikes of different neurons are measured in correspondence to a specific behavior, timing may be controlled to within 3 milliseconds. 2) Experiments Description and Drawings Analysis In our experiments single unit activity was recorded from 8 microelectrodes inserted into the motor and pre-motor cortices of a monkey while it was freely scribbling. Repeated scribbling paths were extracted by data-mining algorithms (8, 9). These paths are called drawing components. In a typical day there are 12 to 25 such drawing components. Figure 1 illustrates the monkey’s drawings and two simple drawing components. 3 Figure 1. Examples for two drawing components. 30 seconds of drawing is shown in each box. The hand position was sampled 100 times per second (dots in the drawing). The monkey mostly drew in a counter clockwise direction. Scale bar is 50 mm. a, Occurrences of the drawing component: "transitions of drawing direction from a range of 180o-210o to a range of 210o-240o" are marked by thicker dots. b, Occurrences of the drawing component: "transitions of drawing velocity from a range of 20-30 cm/sec to a range of 10-20 cm/sec" are marked by thicker dots. 3) The Main Idea To determine whether there are any precise timing relations between the spikes of two neurons and the drawing, we selected a 300ms time slice before the start of each drawing component. For a given pair of neurons, we counted how many times a spike in the first neuron was followed by a spike in the second neuron within 0-1 ms, 2-3 ms… 98-99 ms. The interval that repeated the largest number of times was hypothesized to show precise firing times in relation to this particular drawing component. For example, the interval 9091 ms between neuron #1 from electrode 8 (noted by 8.1) and neuron #2 from electrode 1 (noted by 1.2) repeated 372 times within the time window 400ms to 100ms prior to the drawing component that was illustrated in Fig. 1.b. 62 of these repetitions are depicted in Figure 2 (uniformly distributed such that 1 of each 6 is shown). This figure shows one of the least likely relations between a certain drawing component and a certain pair of neurons in this recording day. 4 Figure 2. Dot display showing occurrences of a frequent inter-spike interval around occurrences of the drawing component that was shown in Fig. 1.b. Top panel shows the firing times of unit 8.1. The bottom panel shows the firing times of unit 1.2. Each linelet represents a single spike. Each of the 62 lines in both panels shows spikes occurred around the appropriate 62 (chosen out of 372) occurrences of the drawing component, in which it was preceded at least once by the interval 90-91 ms in the window of 0.4 to 0.1 seconds before the start of the drawing component. Linelets representing spikes which took 5 part in the selected interval are colored red. The rasters were aligned on the first spike of the selected interval. If the same interval appeared twice around the same movement, the first occurrence was used for alignment, and the other occurrences appear as red linelets somewhere else along the raster. The time of onset of the drawing is colored blue. Trials are sorted by increasing delays between the neural intervals and the drawing components. The gray line in each panel represents the average firing rate considering all 372 common occurrences. Are these 372 occurrences random? To assess the probability of chance events we generated 1000 surrogate spike trains by randomly teetering the time of each spike within 10ms around its real time. For each of these surrogates we used the same idea for counting all possible intervals between neurons 8.1 and 1.2, which were repeated around the same drawing component during the same time slice. Similarly, the maximal frequency of these intervals was taken as a representative of that surrogate. In the example shown in Fig. 2 these 1000 maximal frequencies tended to be significantly smaller than 372. Their mean and their variance were used to estimate the probability of these 372 repetitions, assuming normal distribution of counts. For this drawing component and pair of neurons the mean was 350.678 and the standard deviation was 5.01, yielding a probability of 0.00001. Is this truly so unlikely? Probably not! The counting process is most probably not distributed normally, so that assessing probability by the mean and variance may be misleading. A much more complicated issue involves finding a rare event for all 12 drawing components recorded that day. We analyzed all the 50 possible pairs of neurons 6 on that day, all 50 possible time intervals for each pair, and for 7 different time slices around the start of each of the drawing components. Picking the rarest event out of all these possibilities should yield a highly unlikely event. Hence, we need to assess the likelihood of finding such low probabilities when multiple trials are conducted. 4) Statistical Analysis A solution which can be used to test the null hypothesis that spike times are random within a window of width W was offered (10, 11). If this null hypothesis is true, then replacing the time of each spike by a randomly selected time within W around its true time should not affect any of the statistics extracted from the spike times. To use this idea we need to describe the entire set of relations between firing intervals and drawing by one statistic. To do so we defined a statistic based on the ten least likely relations between pairs of spikes and any of the drawing components. We termed this the relations-score. For each recording day we computed a relations-score for the actual data. Then we randomly teetered all spike times within some time window W and recomputed it for the teetered data. Teetering was done 5000 times independently and a histogram of the relation-scores for teetered data was constructed. Figure 3 illustrates this histogram for W=10ms. Note that all computations of relations-score for each teetered data were done de novo by the same process as was done for the actual data (including multiple trials of all possible drawing components, pairs of neurons, time intervals and time slices). 7 Figure 3. Distribution of relations-scores for surrogate spike trains and the actual data. Five thousand surrogate spike trains were independently generated by teetering spike times within 10ms. For each of these a relation-score was extracted. The distribution of these relations-score values was estimated by a histogram. The actual data had a value of 106.37 (arrow). None of the 5000 surrogate trains had a value above it. Hence the p-value for the actual data was estimated as less than 1/5000. This method was used to estimate the probability p of the relations-score value of the actual data. From this p we derived the surprise-value which was defined as the value of – log2(p). Figure 4 shows the surprise values for one recording session, obtained when spike times were teetered within different windows between 2ms and 8ms. Clearly, teetering within 3ms already had a significant effect on the surprise value. Thus the spike times of the cortical neurons are accurate within 3ms. 8 Figure 4. Surprise values for different teetering windows. Abscissa is the teetering window, ordinate is the surprise value. The horizontal line shows the surprise value for significance of 0.05. Thus, teetering within 3ms already had a significant effect. Significant relations-score values were observed for all 3 recording days in this study. The smallest windows W producing significant results were 3ms (shown here), 6ms and 12ms respectively. Note that these represent an upper bound for the resolution. One may find a different statistic that can indicate even higher time precision. When the same procedure was repeated step by step for the neural data around randomly selected points in time (instead of time occurrences of drawing components), no significant surprise values were found (for a window W of 10ms). Thus we only obtained significant time relations by relating the neural intervals to specific features in the behavior. Furthermore, no significant surprise values were found when the same procedure was repeated taking a teetered neural data instead of the original data. 9 5) Discussion Numerous studies have reported precise time relations among spikes in the cortex (11-17). In some cases it was claimed that the results were attributed to insufficient statistics (1819). In some cases the analysis was limited to precise synchrony, and in some cases the relations to behavior were not clear. Our null hypothesis that spike times are not determined within W milliseconds can be easily tested by teetering. We were able to show that the null hypothesis could be rejected for W=3ms. However, there are cellular mechanisms and experimental artefacts that may generate precise spike timing. These include: a. neurons can recover rapidly from the refractory period; b. spike intervals within a burst may repeat with high precision; c. periodic activity driven by internal pace-maker processes (not due to network oscillations); d. dead time for spike detection when recording is made through the same electrode; e. sharp on or off responses to an external stimulus with abrupt onset (or offset). By considering only intervals between spikes of units recorded with different electrodes, we avoided precise intervals that could be ascribed to a., b., c., or d. above. The continuous drawing motion does not generate abrupt time markers that might be responsible for e. Examinations of dot displays as given in figure 2 show that the involved spikes (red linelets) were isolated, not periodic, and not located at the onset of sharp changes in activity rates. Figure 2 provides further indications that the relations between the neural interval and the drawing component were not random or due to trivial artefacts. First, in both panels the 10 firing rate is stationary. In this condition, had the red marks been random, the spike density around these dots marks should have approximated the autocorrelation function which must be symmetric. However the little troughs on both sides of the peak (relative refractoriness) are not symmetric. The difference is significant at 0.0002. Second, in dot displays showing another unlikely relations, the delay between the neuronal component and the drawing component (blue marks) is not evenly distributed between -0.4 and -0.1 seconds, as might be expected for chance relations. One would hope to see 1 to 1 relations between precise firing intervals and drawing components. This is not found here, probably because the sparse sampling. We record from a score of neurons from a region containing hundreds of thousands. However, the relation of our findings to behavior is underscored by the fact that when random time points (rather than start of drawing components) were chosen, no significant relations scores were found. These findings, highlighting the precision of spike times in the cortex, raises three types of questions concerning their generation, the way they are read out and their use. Previous research has shown that synfire chains may produce and readout such precise timing (20) and this property may be used for the dynamic binding of components into a whole (6). Whether the nervous system takes advantage of these features remains open to debate. 11 6) References 1. M. Abeles, Corticonics: Neural Circuits of the Cerebral Cortex (Cambridge Univ. Press, New-York, 1991). 2. V. Braitenberg, A. Shuez, Cortex: Statistics and Geometry of Neuronal Connectivity (Springer, Berlin, ed. 2, 1998). 3. H. B. Barlow, Single units and sensation: a neuron doctrine for perceptual psychology. Perception 1, 371-394 (1972). 4. Y. Ikegaya et al. Synfire chains and cortical songs: temporal modules of cortical activity. Science 23, 559-564 (2004). 5. C. Malsburg, The correlation theory of brain function. MPI Biophysical Chemistry, Internal report 81-2 (1981). Reprinted in Models of Neural Networks II (E. Domany, J.L. vanHemmen and K. Shulten eds.) 95-119 (Springer, Berlin 1994). 6. E. Bienenstock, BrainTtheory: Biological Basis and Computational Properties (A. Aertsen, V. Braitenberg, Eds.) 269-300 (B. V. Elsvier Sci., Amsterdam, 1996). 7. L. Shastri, V. Ajjanagadde, From simple associations to systematic reasoning. Behav. Brain Sci. 16, 417-494 (1993). 8. H. Mannila, H. Toivonen, A. I. Verkamo, Discovering frequent episodes in sequences. KDD 210-215 (1995). 9. H. Mannila, H. Toivonen, Discovering generalized episodes using minimal occurrences. KDD 146-151 (1996). 10. A. Date, E. Bienenstock, S. Geman, A statistical tool for testing hypothesis about the temporal resolution of neural activity. Soc. Neurosci. Abstr. 26, 828.6 (2000). 11. N. Hastopoulos, S. Geman, A. Amarasingham, E. Bienenstock, At what time scale does the nervous system operate? Neurocomputing 52-54, 25-29 (2003). 12. C. M. Gray, W. Singer, Stimulus specific neuronal oscillations in orientation columns of cat visual cortex. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 86, 1698-1702 (1989). 13. W. Singer, C. M. Gray, Visual feature integration and the temporal correlation hypothesis. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 18, 555-586 (1995). 14. A. Riehle, S. Grun, M. Diesmann, A. Aertsen, Spike synchronization and rate modulation differentially involved in motor cortical function. Science 278, 1950-1953 (1997). 15. M. Abeles, I. Gat, Detecting precise firing sequences in experimental data. J. Neurosci. Methods 107, 141-154 (2001). 16. Z. Nadasdy, H. Hirase, A. Czurko, J. Csicsvari, G. Buzsaki, Replay and time compression of recurring spike sequences in the hippocampus. J. Neurosci. 19, 9497507 (1999). 17. A. E. Villa, I. V. Tetko, B. Hyland, A. Najem, Spatiotemporal activity patterns of rat cortical neurons predict responses in a conditioned task. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 96, 1106-1111 (1999). 18. M. W. Oram, M. C. Wiener, R. Lestienne, B. J. Richmond, Stochastic Nature of Precisely Timed Spike Patterns in Visual System Neuronal Responses. J. Neurophysiol. 81, 3021-3033 (1999). 12 19. S. Baker, R. N. Lemon, Precise spatiotemporal repeating patterns in monkey primary and supplementary motor areas occur at chance level. J. Neurophysiol. 84, 1770-1780 (2000). 20. M. Abeles et al. Dynamics of neuronal interactions in the frontal cortex of behaving monkeys. Concepts in Neurosci. 4, 131-158 (1993). Acknowledgements: This project was funded in part by grants from ISF, GIF, DIP, Horowitz Fund, and the RICH center. MA is a Shamoon professor at Bar-Ilan University. TS was responsible for the analysis and was aided by OS. RD was responsible for the experimental part and was aided by YBS, ZN, and MA. MT overviewed the analysis. MA overviewed the entire project. 13 Attachment A: Methods Overview A Maccaca fascicularis monkey was trained to hold a two-joint manipulandum and scribble in the horizontal plane. Continuous movement was reinforced by juice rewards. After training the monkey, a recording chamber and a head holder were attached to the skull under full surgical anesthesia in aseptic conditions. The chamber position was verified by MRI, cortical microstimulation, and histology. After recovery, daily recording of cortical activity with 8, individually movable, micro electrodes commenced. Monkey handling and treatment conformed the law and was approved by the institutional ethics committee. Single unit activity was extracted and isolated on line by MSD (Alpha Omega, Nazareth). Only shapes which were regarded as well-isolated or at most as a mixture of two spike shapes were used. Spike times were recorded at a time-resolution of 1ms. The three recording days with the largest number of isolated units and stationary activity were analyzed. Directions of drawing were quantized into 12 sections of 300 each. Similarly, velocity of drawing was quantized into 5 sections of 10 cm/sec each (0-10, 10-20, … , 40-50). Transitions of the direction or of the velocity from one section to another were considered as elementary events. Sequences of such events were revealed by data-mining techniques (8, 9). One or more elementary events which repeated at least 750 times were considered as drawing-components. The time interval between the first and the last events constructing a drawing component was limited to 0.5sec at most. 14 The relations-score evaluating the relations between time-coordination of spikes and drawing components was computed in the following way. For each drawing component D we marked all times at which D occurred. Around these occurrences and for each pair of neurons, we looked for the most frequent time interval between the spikes generated by these neurons. We estimated a p-value for the frequency of this interval (defined by the two neurons) assuming a normal distribution whose mean and variance were estimated by another 1000 independently teetered spike trains. The mean and the variance were computed for every drawing component D and for every pair of neurons using the teetered spikes. Finally, a relations-score was defined as the sum of the highest ten "–log2(pvalue)" values that evaluated relations consisting of distinct intervals alone. 15 Attachment B: Supporting Detailed Material Our main idea was to look for unknown relations between hand motion and patterns of spikes. In our analysis we focused on finding relations that involve exact time delays between spikes. The relations were found using various statistical methods including datamining techniques, and their probability of occurring by chance was evaluated using 5000 surrogate spike trains having the same firing-rate undulations as the actual data. 1. The experiment Maccaca fascicularis monkeys were trained to hold a two-joint manipulandum and scribble in the horizontal plane. One out of 19 hexagonal patches which tiled the working space was randomly selected as a target. When the monkey hit the target, a short beep was sounded, the monkey obtained a juice reward and the target jumped at random to another location. Each piece of drawing till a reward was considered a single trial. In this way the monkey was encouraged to produce continuous movements. After training, a recording chamber and a head holder were attached to the skull under full surgical anesthesia in aseptic conditions. The chamber position was verified by MRI. Proximal arm regions were identified by cortical microstimulation and the border between M1 and PreM by histology. After recovery, daily recordings of cortical activity with 8 individually movable microelectrodes commenced. After recording for several weeks, the monkey was trained to alternate between trials of scribbling and trials of a standard center-out motion. Data were initially stored in the computer memory and after 10 rewards, or one minute with no reward, were transferred into disk files. Each file only contained trials with similar 16 behavior. Single unit activity was extracted on-line by MSD (Alpha Omega, Nazareth). Only shapes which were regarded as well-isolated or as a mixture of two spike shapes at most were used. Times of spikes were recorded at a time-resolution of 1ms. Simultaneously, the manipulandum position was sampled 100 times per second. Monkeys’ handling and treatment conformed the law, were approved by the institutional ethics committee, and were supervised by a veterinarian. Here, only data obtained for blocks of scribbling motion were analyzed. We felt that the statistics would benefit from having long stretches of stationary recording with multiple neurons. Therefore, we looked for recording days with penetrations in which many cells showed arm related activity based on intra-cortical microstimulations (train duration 100200 ms, 300 pulses per second each lasting, 0.2ms, amplitude <= 50A) and/or passive manipulations of arm joints. Only days with at least 400 correct trials were selected. All isolated units were tested for stability of total spike count in a fixed window ranging from 1000ms before the reward event until the reward. For each unit we used only a continuous range of files in which its activity was judged to be stable. The results in this article are based on the 3 recording days which best fit the above criteria. These days contained 8 to 12 isolated units recorded through 4-8 electrodes that showed stationary activity in a range of 10 to 44 files. 2. Drawing components and neural components The first goal was finding repeating patterns for each kind of data independently. These patterns are termed drawing components and neural components respectively. 17 2.1. Drawing events and drawing components In order to find repeated patterns of drawing we used data-mining techniques (1, 2). For this purpose the continuous drawing must be converted into a sequence of events (drawing events). In one experimental day there are hundreds of such events. Searching for repeating sequences of events is greatly facilitated by algorithms of data-mining. A drawing event was marked as occurring at the time at which a certain drawing-property changed from one range of values to another. The property itself may be arbitrarily chosen. For example, it could be defined as a change in the drawing direction from a range of 0o30o to a range of 30o-60o. Other definitions can be based on changes in the curvature or in the velocity of the drawing. Once a set of criteria for identifying drawing events is defined, the drawing data is translated into a sequence of these events along the time axis. Then, data-mining algorithms are activated to detect repeating subsequences in the translated data. The repeating subsequences are called drawing components. Naturally, different definitions of the set of criteria lead to different drawing components. Figure 5 illustrates three drawing components found in one recording day, where two types of drawing events were used: changes in the direction and changes in the curvature. In this article, only drawing events which were defined using direction changes and velocity changes were used. All possible drawing directions were quantized into 12 sections of 300 each. Transitions from one section to another were considered as drawing events. Similarly, drawing velocity was quantized to 5 sections of 10 cm/sec each. Sequences of such events which repeat at least 750 times during the recording day and last 18 for at most 0.5sec were considered as drawing components. There were 12 to 25 different drawing components for a given day. 2.2. Neural components The basic entity of the neural data is a single spike generated at a specific time by a specific neuron. A neural component was defined as a triple (n1, n2, delta) where n1 and n2 are two neurons and delta is a time-interval (between spikes generated by these neurons). In this way, each pair of spikes in the neural data could be interpreted as an occurrence of some neural component. For the results given in this article, time-intervals between spikes were limited to 100ms and were quantized to 2ms (i.e. 38ms and 39ms were both interpreted as the same interval). Hence each pair of neurons yielded 50 distinct neural components. Spike sorting by shapes that were recorded through a single electrode can result in confusions. Intracellular properties which may generate precise time intervals can be confused with precise timing which is generated by the organization of activity in the network. Therefore, we considered only neural components consisting of two neurons that were recorded through different electrodes. For example, if we have 3 electrodes recording spikes from 2 neurons each, there are 30-6=24 valid pairs of neurons (note that the pairs <n1,n2> and <n2,n1> are different). Altogether, we have 24*50=1200 potential neural components, some of which may never occur. In the days analyzed there were 1938, 2142 and 6195 such neural components. 19 Figure 5. Examples of three drawing components found by data-mining techniques. Each row represents several occurrences of the same component which are marked by thicker lines. The drawing components were based on direction changes and on curvature changes of the drawing. 3. Relations between drawing components and pairs of neurons Once we had the time occurrences of all the drawing components and the neural components, we were interested in finding relations between drawing components and pairs of neurons. For each drawing component A and for each possible pair of different neurons <n1, n2> we counted the occurrences of each neural component around A that consisted of a spike from n1 and a spike from n2. In other words, we were interested in the total occurrences of each relevant time-interval between a spike of n1 and a spike of n2. The time regions in which we counted these intervals were determined relative to the occurrences of A by two external parameters Tfrom and Tto. Formally, suppose that during a 20 recording day A occurred at {T1,T2,T3,…,Tn}, then the time regions are [Ti+Tfrom, Ti+Tto] where 1≤i≤n. Eventually, we defined the support of a relation to be the total number of occurrences of the most frequent interval. Figure 6 illustrates the count of a specific time-interval around 4 occurrences of a drawing component where [Tfrom,Tto] was [-0.4sec,-0.1sec]. Note that in practice, the supports of the relations were computed for each [Tfrom,Tto] in { [-1.4,-1.1], [1.2,-0.9], [-1.0,-0.7], …, [-0.2, 0.1] }. At a later stage, the range with the strongest result was selected for each recording day. Figure 6. An example for counting neural components around drawing components. Bottom trace-times show the occurrences of a drawing component A. Vertical linelets show the times at which neurons 1.2 and 8.0 generated spikes. For each occurrence of A we look at a window that started 400ms before it and lasted for 300ms (marked in red), and count the occurrences of each possible neural component (that consists of these two neurons) whose first spike is inside this window. Thicker blue and green linelets show the occurrences of a particular neural component in which neuron 8.0 emitted a spike and then, within 38 to 39 milliseconds, neuron 1.2 emitted a spike. In this illustration, the illustrated neural component repeats 4 times around A. 21 Figure 7 shows appearances of the drawing component that was shown in figure 1.a (in the article) as well as the spike activity around these appearances. This figure provides further indications that the relations between the neural interval and the drawing component were not random or due to trivial artefacts. The delay between the neuronal component and the drawing component (blue marks) is not evenly distributed between -0.4 and -0.1 seconds as might be expected for chance relations. Second, in the lower panel the firing rate is stationary. In this condition, had the red marks been random, the spike density around these dots marks should have approximated the autocorrelation function which must be symmetric. However the little troughs on both sides of the peak (relative refractoriness) are not symmetric. The difference is significant at 0.013. 22 Figure 7. Dot display showing occurrences of a frequent inter-spike interval around occurrences of the drawing component that was shown in Fig. 1.a in the article. The top panel shows the firing times of unit 8.0. The bottom panel shows the firing times of unit 1.2. Each linelet represents a single spike. Each of the 63 lines in both panels shows spikes occurred around the appropriate 63 occurrences of the drawing component, in which it was preceded at least once by the interval 38-39 ms in the window of 0.4 to 0.1 seconds 23 before the start of the drawing component. For all other details about the dot display, see the legend of figure 2 in the article. 4. Evaluations using teetered neural data Using the computed support for each relation in a recording day, a statistic called the relations-score was extracted for this day (details are given in the next section). Intuitively, relations-score gets larger as the likelihood of the support for the relations decreases. Once a relations-score was computed for the actual data (denoted by S0), we evaluated its probability of occurring by chance. As relations between hand motion and firing rates of neurons have been studied extensively (3, 4), we wanted to test whether S0 was significantly higher than what we would expect from random data that have similar firing rates. In order to simulate random data that preserves firing rates of neurons, we randomly teetered the time of each original spike within a small window of W milliseconds (5). For example if W=10ms and the original time of some spike was 125ms, its new time after teetering may be any time within [120ms,130ms]. Using this technique, we generated 5000 such surrogate spike trains. Each surrogate train was given a relations-score (S1,S2,S3,…,S5000 respectively) following exactly the same procedure as for computing S0 (including re-selection of the best range [Tfrom, Tto] that leads to the largest relations-score). These 5000 values were used for estimating the probability (denoted by p(S0)) of getting the value S0 by chance. For example, if only 50 surrogate trains exceeded the relations-score of the actual data, then 24 p(S0) was estimated by 50/5000=1%. Table 1 shows the minimal width of the teetering window for each day that led to a significant value of p(S0). Day 16jul00 28jun00 27jun00 Minimal width of teetering window 3ms 6ms 12ms Table 1. The minimal widths of the teetering windows used in each of the three recording days to obtain a value of p(S0) which was less than 5%. Note that no significant results were achieved when smaller windows were used, and even higher significant results were achieved when larger windows were used. A significant value for this probability indicates that the relations between drawing components and pairs of neurons (in that day) are damaged as a result of teetering within W milliseconds. By this we can conclude that around the occurrences of similar behavior, pairs of spikes tend to prefer some specific time delays. 25 5. The computation of relations-score The computation of the relations-score statistic for a recording day involves the following steps: A) Generate a set of 1000 independent teetered neural data (denoted by J1000) B) Recognize all potential relations between a drawing component and a pair of neurons. C) For each relation R do the following: 1) Compute the support of R (denoted by Rsupport). 2) Skip R if its support is less than a predefined noise threshold. This step is carried out for both actual and teetered data in order to prune noisy relations. Note that the values used for this threshold were 60, 40 and 20 for the 3 different recording days (depending on the firing rates of the neurons in that day) 3) Compute the support of R for each neural data in J1000 (using the same drawing component). 4) Compute the mean and the variance 2 of these 1000 values. 5) Estimate the probability of Rsupport assuming the normal distribution N( , 2 ) 6) Set Rsurprise to –log2(Prob{Rsupport}) D) Sort all relations by descending order of their computed Rsurprise. E) If several relations involve the same two neurons and the same interval between them, delete them all except from the first (the one whose Rsurprise is the highest). F) Set relations-score by the sum of the Rsurprise values of the first 10 relations. 26 Note that step E is done to reduce dependencies between the most unlikely relations that are used in step F. For example, if the 10 best relations contain a relation that connects a neural component N to some drawing component C1 as well as a relation that connects the same N to another drawing component C2, we do not consider both relations for computing relations-score. The logic beyond this idea is that C1 and C2 may be dependent. Suppose that C1 is based on direction changes and C2 is based on velocity changes, this dependency is supported by the two-thirds-power-law. 6. Verifications Several tests and verifications were made in order to ensure the reliability of the given results. We repeated the entire process described in this article in order to evaluate p(S0) on sham data. These sham data were built by teetering the actual neural data within 10ms and then using them as the input for the entire algorithm (including re-teetering the sham data for 5000 times etc…). Note that no significant results were found for any of the recording days in any of the 7 tested [Tfrom,Tto] windows. No significant results were found when we invented the occurrence times of each drawing component. For this operation, if a drawing component i repeated Ni times, we selected Ni random times, and repeated the entire procedure. No significant results were found when the time region around the drawing component was later than the occurrence of the drawing component (i.e. Tfrom>0). 27 We observed that the same significant results can be achieved using much smaller number of teetered data. This fact may indicate a small variance in the estimation of p(S0). 7. References 1. H. Mannila, H. Toivonen, A. I. Verkamo, Discovering frequent episodes in sequences. KDD 210-215 (1995). 2. H. Mannila, H. Toivonen, Discovering generalized episodes using minimal occurrences. KDD 146-151 (1996). 3. Evarts, E.V. Pyramidal tract activity associated with a conditioned hand movement in the monkey. J. Neurophysiol. 29, 1011-1027 (1966). 4. A. P. Georgopoulos, J. F. Kalsaska, R. Caminity, J. T. Massey, On the relations between the direction of two dimensional arm movement and cell discharge in primate motor cortex. J. Neurosci. 2, 1527-1537 (1982). 5. A. Date, E. Bienenstock, S. Geman, A statistical tool for testing hypothesis about the temporal resolution of neural activity. Soc. Neurosci. Abstr. 26, 828.6 (2000).