HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 91/4/1608    most recent 00277.2003v1 Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Web of Science (13) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by White, R. L. Articles by Snyder, L. H. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by White, R. L., III Articles by Snyder, L. H.

A Neural Network Model of Flexible Spatial Updating

Department of Anatomy and Neurobiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri 63110

Submitted 21 March 2003; accepted in final form 30 November 2003

Neurons in many cortical areas involved in visuospatial processing represent remembered spatial information in retinotopic coordinates. During a gaze shift, the retinotopic representation of a target location that is fixed in the world (world-fixed reference frame) must be updated, whereas the representation of a target fixed relative to the center of gaze (gaze-fixed) must remain constant. To investigate how such computations might be performed, we trained a 3-layer recurrent neural network to store and update a spatial location based on a gaze perturbation signal, and to do so flexibly based on a contextual cue. The network produced an accurate readout of target position when cued to either reference frame, but was less precise when updating was performed. This output mimics the pattern of behavior seen in animals performing a similar task. We tested whether updating would preferentially use gaze position or gaze velocity signals, and found that the network strongly preferred velocity for updating world-fixed targets. Furthermore, we found that gaze position gain fields were not present when velocity signals were available for updating. These results have implications for how updating is performed in the brain.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				C. R. Cassanello, A. T. Nihalani, and V. P. Ferrera Neuronal Responses to Moving Targets in Monkey Frontal Eye Fields J Neurophysiol, September 1, 2008; 100(3): 1544 - 1556. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. R. Cassanello and V. P. Ferrera Computing vector differences using a gain field-like mechanism in monkey frontal eye field J. Physiol., July 15, 2007; 582(2): 647 - 664. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Tanaka Spatiotemporal Properties of Eye Position Signals in the Primate Central Thalamus Cereb Cortex, July 1, 2007; 17(7): 1504 - 1515. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. L White III and L. H Snyder Spatial constancy and the brain: insights from neural networks Phil Trans R Soc B, March 29, 2007; 362(1479): 375 - 382. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. Van Pelt and W. P. Medendorp Gaze-Centered Updating of Remembered Visual Space During Active Whole-Body Translations J Neurophysiol, February 1, 2007; 97(2): 1209 - 1220. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. A. Smith and J. D. Crawford Distributed Population Mechanism for the 3-D Oculomotor Reference Frame Transformation J Neurophysiol, March 1, 2005; 93(3): 1742 - 1761. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. D. Crawford, W. P. Medendorp, and J. J. Marotta Spatial Transformations for Eye-Hand Coordination J Neurophysiol, July 1, 2004; 92(1): 10 - 19. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]