A model of smooth pursuit in primates based on learning the target dynamics
Introduction
Due to their narrow foveal vision, which has a viewing angle of only a few degrees, primates have to move their eyes to acquire accurate information on small moving targets in the environment. Smooth pursuit eye movements (SPEMs) perform this function and can achieve remarkable performance. For example, humans can maintain a velocity gain, i.e. the ratio of eye velocity to target velocity, of one up to a target speed of about 20°/s, while monkeys have been reported to even exceed this value. The accuracy of smooth pursuit is not only confined to constant velocity targets but has also been observed in periodic motion such as sinusoidal signals with frequencies of less than about 1 Hz (Dallos and Jones, 1963, Stark et al., 1962, Westheimer, 1954). Even a phase lead of the eyes can sometimes be observed in such experiments. Due to the information processing delays (e.g. 80–130 ms for human brain) in the visual pathways, the experimentally observed high performance of the smooth pursuit system cannot be achieved solely with standard negative feedback methods based on visual error signals. Under such delayed information processing, simple feedback control has a significant phase shift to the target signal, and thus some form of predictive control must take place (Pavel, 1990).
Several experimental results have been reported that also shed some light on the predictive nature of the smooth pursuit system. Morris and Lisberger, 1983, Morris and Lisberger, 1987 demonstrated that monkeys were able to execute smooth pursuit with zero retinal slip by using a special target presentation technique called ‘target stabilization’. It is also known that monkeys can maintain smooth pursuit during blink periods, i.e. a sudden disappearance of the target for a brief moment (Churchland and Lisberger, 2000, Kawano et al., 1994, Newsome et al., 1988, Pola and Wyatt, 1997, Sakata et al., 1983). Such predictive compensation has been observed both in constant velocity and sinusoidally moving targets (Becker and Fuchs, 1985, Fukushima et al., 2002, Whittaker and Eaholtz, 1982).
Therefore, it seems clear that SPEMs are a key to uncovering mechanisms for predicting the external world in the primate brain. In place of previous models, this article develops a SPEM model that employs a compact representation of the target motion that can be quickly learned in an on-line fashion based on visual error signals. By taking neuroanatomical findings into account, our model further suggests that the medial superior temporal (MST) area has the possibility of predicting target velocity using only signals that originate from visual information, without relying on efference copies of the oculomotor command or proprioceptive feedback.
Section snippets
Previous models
Pioneering computational models for SPEMs (Robinson et al., 1986, Yasui and Young, 1975) attempted to cancel out the feedback signal in order to enable high velocity gain; their model works as a feedforward controller. Fig. 1 describes the essence of Robinson's model. In this model, the feedback signal with a delay Δ1 is precisely canceled out by a positive feedback loop with the delay Δ1+Δ3. However, their feedforward pathway still contains a significant delay determined by Δ2 and τ such that
Simulation setup
In order to verify that our model can achieve smooth pursuit with gain one and zero-latency, we conducted two evaluations by simulation. In one setup, the input was a ramp input with a constant velocity of 0.5 rad/s, and in the other setup, a sinusoidal input was chosen with a frequency of 1.0 Hz. Note that the dynamics of these inputs is a second-order linear system, which guarantees that the current target velocity can be predicted by the past target state, i.e. position and velocity.
Fig. 3 is
Discussion
We have presented a computational model employing a predictive controller with fast learning of the target dynamics enables zero-lag SPEMs. In our model, the representation of the target motion is much simpler than the memory-based model, and learning proceeds quickly, decreasing the retinal slip without waiting for one period of the target motion. Our model can also maintain SPEMs during the target blinking. We have also demonstrated that the learning predictor of target motion can be realized
References (63)
Timing-based LTP and LTD at vertical inputs to layer II/III pyramidal cells in rat barrel cortex
Neuron
(2000)Internal models for motor control and trajectory planning
Current Opinion in Neurobiology
(1999)Accommodative vergence in the alert monkey. Motor unit analysis
Visual Research
(1973)- et al.
Offset dynamics of human smooth pursuit eye movements: Effects of target presence and subject attention
Visual Research
(1997) An optimal estimation approach to visual perception and learning
Visual Research
(1999)- et al.
Cortical development and remapping through spike timing-dependent plasticity
Neuron
(2001) - et al.
A mathematical analysis of the characteristics of the system connecting the cerebellar ventral paraflocculus and extraculormotor nucleus of alert monkeys during upward ocular following responses
Neuroscience Research
(2000) - et al.
Model emulates human smooth pursuit system producing zero-latency target tracking
Biological Cybernetics
(1983) - et al.
Predictive mechanisms of head-eye coordination and vestibulo-ocular reflex suppression in humans
Journal of Vestibular Research
(1992) - et al.
Modelling prediction in ocular pursuit
Prediction in the oculomotor system: smooth pursuit
Experimental Brain Research
Synaptic modifications in cultured hippocampal neurons: Dependence on spike timing, synaptic strength, and postsynaptic cell type
Journal of Neuroscience
Distributed synaptic modification in neural networks induced by patterned stimulation
Nature
Probabilistic motion estimation based on temporal coherence
Neural Computation
Apparent motion produce multiple deficits in visually guided smooth pursuit eye movements of monkeys
Journal of Neurophysiology
Learning behaviour of the eye fixation control system
IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control
Eye position signals modulate early dorsal and ventral visual areas
Cerebral Cortex
Pursuit and optokinetic deficits following chemical lesions of cortical areas MT and MST
Journal of Neurophysiology
Directional pursuit deficits following lesions of the foveal representation within the superior temporal sulcus of the macaque monkey
Journal of Neurophysiology
Response to motion in extrastriate area MSTI: Centresurround interactions
Journal of Neurophysiology
A neuronal correlate of spatial stability during periods of self-induced visual motion
Experimental Brain Research
Predictive responses of periarcuate pursuit neurons to visual target motion
Experimental Brain Research
Coding of smooth eye movements in three-dimensional space by frontal cortex
Nature
Neuronal population coding of movement direction
Science
Neural responses related to smooth-pursuit eye movements and their correspondence with electrically elicited smooth eye movements in the primate frontal eye field
Jouranl of Neurophysiology
Neutral networks for control, chapter 13 an adaptive sensorimotor network inspired by the anatomy and physiology of the cerebellum
Response properties of neurons in posterior parietal cortex of monkey during visual-vestibular stimulation. I. Visual tracking neurons
Journal of Neurophysiology
Neural activity in cortical area MST of alert monkey during ocular following responses
Journal of Neurophysiology
Relation of cortical areas MT and MST to pursuit eye movements. I. Localization and visual properties of neurons
Journal of Neurophysiology
Relation of cortical areas MT and MST to pursuit eye movements. III. Interaction with full-field visual stimulation
Journal of Neurophysiology
Modualtion of pursuit eye movements by stimulation of cortical areas MT and MST
Journal of Neurophysiology
Cited by (59)
Dynamic causal modelling of eye movements during pursuit: Confirming precision-encoding in V1 using MEG
2016, NeuroImageCitation Excerpt :Note that in this study we are not seeking to validate our model of oculomotor pursuit: this model is a tool for us to validate our methods of inferring changes in subjective precision. We do not therefore compare the performance of our pursuit model with the many other well-established SPEM models in the literature (Barnes and Asselman, 1991; Krauzlis and Lisberger, 1989; Robinson et al., 1986; Shibata et al., 2005) for two reasons. First, our pursuit model treats SPEM and saccades as quantitative variants of the same process and is thus fundamentally different from traditional models: in short, it is not a model of SPEM per se, but a means of inferring subjective precision.
Active inference and oculomotor pursuit: The dynamic causal modelling of eye movements
2015, Journal of Neuroscience MethodsCitation Excerpt :In terms of modelling, we have also shown that it is possible to use empirical data to inform (invert) relatively sophisticated Bayesian or normative models of behaviour. There are many carefully constructed and validated descriptive SPEM models in the literature (e.g. Barnes, 2008; Deno et al., 1995; Krauzlis and Lisberger, 1989; Krauzlis, 2004; Lisberger, 2010; Robinson et al., 1986; Shibata et al., 2005): however, the generative model that we used is distinguished in the sense that it is a special case of generic (predictive coding) models that conform to normative (Bayesian) principles. We have previously shown that formally similar generative models can reproduce both control and schizophrenic subjects’ pursuit of targets whose occlusion is either expected or unexpected, and of targets that unpredictably change direction (Adams et al., 2012).
Direct recordings in human cortex reveal the dynamics of gamma-band [50-150Hz] activity during pursuit eye movement control
2012, NeuroImageCitation Excerpt :The target to pursue was horizontally displaced and its velocity profile followed a single cycle sinusoidal law of motion constrained to start at zero. Sinusoidal waveforms were chosen because computational modeling suggests that target dynamics knowledge is necessary for predictive control of pursuit for sinusoidal targets, in contrast to linear pursuit (Shibata et al., 2005). The period was fixed (1500 ms) and amplitude and direction of target displacement was varied between trials (± 3, 5, 7°).
MF-GCN: Motion Flow-Based Graph Network Learning Dynamics for Aerial IR Target Recognition
2023, IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems