Somatosensory Cortex Efficiently Processes Touch Located Beyond the Body

Miller, Luke; Fabio, Cécile; Ravenda, Valeria; Bahmad, Salam; Koun, Éric; Salemme, Roméo; Luauté, Jacques; Bolognini, Nadia; Hayward, Vincent; Farnè, Alessandro

doi:10.1016/j.cub.2019.10.043

Cited by 59 publications

(98 citation statements)

References 57 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…One possibility has to do with the need for rapid decoding of location. Tactile localization in body-centered coordinates is completed with as little as 40 milliseconds of processing in primary somatosensory cortex (Miller et al, 2019a). Even with the high firing rate of somatosensory neurons (i.e., 50-100Hz; Bensmaia et al, 2008;Chapman and Ageranioti-Bélanger, 1991;Nicolelis et al, 1998;Reed et al, 2010), this corresponds to only one or two spikes per layer.…”

Section: Simulations Identify Plausible Neural Signatures Of Trilatermentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Indeed, humans can accurately localize where a tool has been touched (Miller et al, 2018;Yamamoto and Kitazawa, 2001). We recently found evidence that mechanisms in somatosensory cortex for localizing touch on an arm are re-used to localize touch on a tool (Miller et al, 2019a). Furthermore, tool use leads to lasting changes in somatosensory perception (Canzoneri et al, 2013;Cardinali et al, 2011;Miller et al, 2014Miller et al, , 2017 that are likely driven by plasticity in somatosensory cortex (Miller et al, 2019b;Schaefer et al, 2004).…”

Section: Model Predictionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A neural surveyor to map touch on the body

Miller

Fabio

Beers

et al. 2020

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Perhaps the most recognizable sensory map in all of neuroscience is the somatosensory homunculus. Though it seems straightforward, this simple representation belies the complex link between an activation in somatosensory Area 3b and the associated touch location on the body. Any isolated activation is spatially ambiguous without a neural decoder that can read its position within the entire map, though how this is computed by neural networks is unknown.We propose that somatosensory cortex implements multilateration, a common computation used by surveying and GPS systems to localize objects. Specifically, to decode touch location on the body, the somatosensory system estimates the relative distance between the afferent input and the body's joints. We show that a simple feedforward neural network which captures the receptive field properties of somatosensory cortex implements a Bayes-optimal multilateral decoder via a combination of bell-shaped (Area 3b) and sigmoidal (Areas 1/2) tuning curves. Simulations demonstrated that this decoder produced a unique pattern of localization variability between two joints that was not produced by other known neural decoders. Finally, we identify this neural signature of multilateration in actual psychophysical experiments, suggesting that it is a candidate computational mechanism underlying tactile localization. take place in the frontal and parietal cortices (Burnod et al., 1999;Crawford et al., 2004;Medendorp et al., 2005;Pesaran et al., 2006).Equally crucial to localizing objects in the environment is localizing objects on the personal space of the body. Despite over 180 years of research on the sense of touch (Weber, 1834), the computations underlying tactile localization remain largely unknown. Recent accounts have suggested that tactile localization requires two computational steps Medina and Coslett, 2010). First, afferent input must be localized within a topographic map in

show abstract

Section: Simulations Identify Plausible Neural Signatures Of Trilatermentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Model Predictionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A neural surveyor to map touch on the body

Miller

Fabio

Beers

et al. 2020

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Specifically, if neglect symptoms are due to disrupted binding, then the extension of body maps into tools could have the consequence of extending the scope of pathology, due to failed integration via coupling with ESMs whose normally coherent dynamics have been compromised. Indeed, resonant coupling with ESMs may be one of the few models capable of explaining the mechanisms whereby external objects (potentially including other agents) may become incorporated into body maps (Miller et al, 2019), with synchronous motions helping to establish this expansion/binding. Further support for potentially radically-embodied bases for phenomenality may also be found in the findings of impaired memory associated with induced out-of-body states (Bergouignan et al, 2014), and superior memory associated with 1 st person points of view (St. Jacques, 2019).…”

Section: Phenomenal Binding Via Esmsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrated World Modeling Theory (IWMT) Revisited

Safron¹

2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Here, I provide clarifications and discuss further issues relating to Safron (2020), “An Integrated World Modeling Theory (IWMT) of consciousness: Combining Integrated Information and Global Workspace Theories with the Free Energy Principle and Active Inference Framework; towards solving the Hard problem and characterizing agentic causation.” As a synthesis of major theories of complex systems and consciousness, with IWMT we may be able to address some of the most difficult problems in the sciences. This is a claim deserving of close scrutiny and much skepticism. What would it take to solve the Hard problem? One could answer the question of how it is possible that something like subjectivity could emerge from objective brain functioning (i.e., moving from a third person to a first person ontology), but a truly satisfying account might still require solving all the “easy” and “real” problems of consciousness. In this way, IWMT does not claim to definitively solve the Hard problem, as explaining all the particular ways that things feel across all relevant aspects of experience is likely an impossible task. Nonetheless, IWMT does claim to have made major inroads into our understanding of consciousness, and here I will attempt to justify this position by discussing challenging problems and outstanding questions with respect to philosophy, (neuro)phenomenology, computational principles, practical applications, and implications for existing theories of mind and life.

show abstract

“…This new finding of Miller et al [2] is surprising because localization on the skin most likely relies on a very different neural mechanism in the body periphery than the interpretation of tool touch via vibration. The human skin contains many mechanoreceptors that connect to somatosensory neurons.…”

mentioning

confidence: 90%

“…Humans can successfully dissociate touch locations on a tool even when they use it for the first time, and a biologically plausible neural network with human-like tactile-sensory characteristics can differentiate these vibrations within 25 ms [1]. Reporting in this issue of Current Biology, Miller et al [2] now show thatdespite the obvious lack of sensors in the tool itself -cortical processing of location is surprisingly similar for tool and body, suggesting that the two may be processed equivalently in the cortex.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%