While the cerebellum's role in motor function is well recognized, the nature of its concurrent role in cognitive function remains considerably less clear. The current consensus paper gathers diverse views on a variety of important roles played by the cerebellum across a range of cognitive and emotional functions. This paper considers the cerebellum in relation to neurocognitive development, language function, working memory, executive function, and the development of cerebellar internal control models and reflects upon some of the ways in which better understanding the cerebellum's status as a “supervised learning machine” can enrich our ability to understand human function and adaptation. As all contributors agree that the cerebellum plays a role in cognition, there is also an agreement that this conclusion remains highly inferential. Many conclusions about the role of the cerebellum in cognition originate from applying known information about cerebellar contributions to the coordination and quality of movement. These inferences are based on the uniformity of the cerebellum's compositional infrastructure and its apparent modular organization. There is considerable support for this view, based upon observations of patients with pathology within the cerebellum.

In Pavlovian delay eyeblink conditioning, the cerebellum represents the passage-of-time (POT) between onsets of conditioned and unconditioned stimuli (CS and US, respectively). To study possible computational mechanisms of the POT representation we built a large-scale spiking network model of the cerebellum. Consistent with our previous rate-coding model, we found two conditions necessary for the present model to represent the POT with a dynamic population of active granule cells: (i) long temporal integration of input signals; and (ii) random recurrent connections between granule and Golgi cells. When these conditions were satisfied, a nonrecurrent sequence of active granule cell populations was generated in response to a CS and, conversely, the POT from the CS onset was able to be read out from the sequence. Specifically, simulated N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) channels with a long decay time constant at granule and Golgi cells were responsible for the long temporal integration. Thus, blocking the NMDA channels or ablating Golgi cells impaired the POT representation. Simulated glomerulus structure made POT representation robust against noise in mossy fibre inputs. Long-term potentiation induced at mossy fibre synapses on granule cells also served to enhance the robustness. We reproduced some experimental results of Pavlovian delay eyeblink conditioning using the present model. These results suggest that the recurrent network in the granular layer and NMDA channels in granule and Golgi cells play an essential role in the timing mechanisms in the cerebellum, whereas the glomerulus serves to realize a robust representation of time.

No abstract

Precise gain and timing control is the goal of cerebellar motor learning. Because the basic neural circuitry of the cerebellum is homogeneous throughout the cerebellar cortex, a single computational mechanism may be used for simultaneous gain and timing control. Although many computational models of the cerebellum have been proposed for either gain or timing control, few models have aimed to unify them. In this paper, we hypothesize that gain and timing control can be unified by learning of the complete waveform of the desired movement profile instructed by climbing fiber signals. To justify our hypothesis, we adopted a large-scale spiking network model of the cerebellum, which was originally developed for cerebellar timing mechanisms to explain the experimental data of Pavlovian delay eyeblink conditioning, to the gain adaptation of optokinetic response (OKR) eye movements. By conducting large-scale computer simulations, we could reproduce some features of OKR adaptation, such as the learning-related change of simple spike firing of model Purkinje cells and vestibular nuclear neurons, simulated gain increase, and frequency-dependent gain increase. These results suggest that the cerebellum may use a single computational mechanism to control gain and timing simultaneously.