2020
DOI: 10.1113/jp278745
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Expansion coding and computation in the cerebellum: 50 years after the Marr–Albus codon theory

Abstract: Fifty years ago, David Marr and James Albus proposed a computational model of cerebellar cortical function based on the pioneering circuit models described by John Eccles, Masao Ito and Janos Szentagothai. The Marr–Albus model remains one of the most enduring and influential models in computational neuroscience, despite apparent falsification of some of the original predictions. We re‐examine the Marr–Albus model in the context of the modern theory of computational neural networks and in the context of expande… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
25
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(27 citation statements)
references
References 88 publications
(234 reference statements)
2
25
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The cerebellar circuit is characterized by two specific features (Figure 1B): (1) the mostly feedforward connectivity from MFs as an input to DN as an output; and (2) the expansion from MFs (input to the cerebellum) to granule cells (GCs; input to the cerebellar cortex) and the compression from MFs to DNCs (output from the cerebellum). A possible computational role of the expansion coding in GCs is reviewed in Sanger et al (2020). Given the multitude of computational functions of the internal forward model, it is not surprising that an impairment of the cerebellum leads to a plethora of motor deficiencies collectively known as cerebellar ataxia (Holmes, 1917).…”
Section: Previous Evidence For Cerebellar Forward Model In the Cerebellummentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The cerebellar circuit is characterized by two specific features (Figure 1B): (1) the mostly feedforward connectivity from MFs as an input to DN as an output; and (2) the expansion from MFs (input to the cerebellum) to granule cells (GCs; input to the cerebellar cortex) and the compression from MFs to DNCs (output from the cerebellum). A possible computational role of the expansion coding in GCs is reviewed in Sanger et al (2020). Given the multitude of computational functions of the internal forward model, it is not surprising that an impairment of the cerebellum leads to a plethora of motor deficiencies collectively known as cerebellar ataxia (Holmes, 1917).…”
Section: Previous Evidence For Cerebellar Forward Model In the Cerebellummentioning
confidence: 99%
“…One may then wonder what the functional advantage of the compact representation is. There appears no consensus on the functional role of the compact representation (Sanger et al, 2020). Given the fact that the cerebellum contributes to fast, trained and automated motor control with reduced effort and attention, the compressed representation may be beneficial or even necessary to extract relevant information from numerous and redundant cerebellar inputs and to assign more attention to the task currently in the focus.…”
Section: Compressed Prediction Of the Cerebellar Internal Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The Purkinje cells receive excitatory inputs from the axons of granule cells (the parallel fibers) that relay the mossy fibers. In humans, there is a striking expansion of the information, as approximately 250 million mossy fibers contact 50 billion granule cells, followed by compression through 15 million Purkinje cells (Sanger et al, 2020). The Purkinje cells also receive excitatory inputs from the climbing fibers that originate in the inferior olivary.…”
Section: Functional Neuroanatomy Of the Cerebellum Relevant To Forward The Model Theorymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Assuming equal weights, the presynaptic sum of GrC activations is expected to be the same across patterns. To differentiate patterns, it is theorized that PCs can manipulate their synaptic weights to affect (increase or decrease) the postsynaptic linear sum of specific GrC activation 7,8,13,17,18,33,40,46 . For Fig.…”
Section: Numerical Analysesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Clustering by the similarity of their inputs generated spatially coherent PC groups, each having higher similarity scores within groups than across groups. These groups of PCs may provide a basis for ensemble learning 21,22,46 .…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%