Advertisement

The Cerebellum

, Volume 7, Issue 4, pp 567–571 | Cite as

Adaptive-filter Models of the Cerebellum: Computational Analysis

  • Paul DeanEmail author
  • John Porrill
Article

Abstract

Many current models of the cerebellar cortical microcircuit are equivalent to an adaptive filter using the covariance learning rule. The adaptive filter is a development of the original Marr–Albus framework that deals naturally with continuous time-varying signals, thus addressing the issue of 'timing' in cerebellar function, and it can be connected in a variety of ways to other parts of the system, consistent with the microzonal organization of cerebellar cortex. However, its computational capacities are not well understood. Here we summarise the results of recent work that has focused on two of its intrinsic properties. First, an adaptive filter seeks to decorrelate its (mossy fibre) inputs from a (climbing fibre) teaching signal. This procedure can be used both for sensory processing, e.g. removal of interference from sensory signals, and for learning accurate motor commands, by decorrelating an efference copy of those commands from a sensory signal of inaccuracy. As a model of the cerebellum the adaptive filter thus forms a natural link between events at the cellular level, such as forms of synaptic plasticity and the learning rules they embody, and intelligent behaviour at the system level. Secondly, it has been shown that the covariance learning rule enables the filter to handle input and intrinsic noise optimally. Such optimality may underlie the recently described role of the cerebellum in producing accurate smooth pursuit eye movements in the face of sensory noise. Moreover, it has the consequence of driving most input weights to very small values, consistent with experimental data that many parallel-fibre synapses are normally silent. The effectiveness of silent synapses can only be altered by LTP, so learning tasks depending on a reduction of Purkinje cell firing require the synapses to be embedded in a second, inhibitory pathway from parallel fibre to Purkinje cell. This pathway and the appropriate climbing-fibre related plasticity have been described experimentally, and its presence has implications for asymmetries and hysteresis in behavioural learning rates that are also consistent with experimental observations. These computational properties of the adaptive filter suggest that it is both powerful and realistic enough to be a suitable candidate model of the cerebellar cortical microcircuit.

Keywords

Adaptive-filter Model Cerebellum Computational analysis 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Supported by the UK Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, under the Novel Computation Initiative (GR/T10602/01), and the UK Biology and Biotechnology Research Council under the Integrative Analysis of Brain and Behaviour Initiative (BBS/B/17026).

References

  1. 1.
    Eccles JC, Ito M, Szentágothai J (1967) The cerebellum as a neuronal machine. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Marr D (1969) A theory of cerebellar cortex. J Physiol 202:437–470PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Albus JS (1971) A theory of cerebellar function. Math Biosci 10:25–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ito M (2006) Cerebellar circuitry as a neuronal machine. Prog Neurobiol 78:272–303PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fujita M (1982) Adaptive filter model of the cerebellum. Biol Cybern 45:195–206PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sejnowski TJ (1977) Storing covariance with nonlinearly interacting neurons. J Math Biol 4:303–321PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Widrow B, Stearns SD (1985) Adaptive signal processing. Prentice-Hall Inc, Engelwood Cliffs NJGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Porrill J, Dean P (2007) Recurrent cerebellar loops simplify adaptive control of redundant and nonlinear motor systems. Neural Comp 19:170–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Porrill J, Dean P (2007) Cerebellar motor learning: when is cortical plasticity not enough? PLoS Comput Biol 3:1935–1950PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dean P, Porrill J (2008) Oculomotor anatomy and the motor-error problem: the role of the paramedian tract nuclei. Prog Brain Res 171:177–186PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lenz A, Balakrishnan T, Pipe AG, Melhuish C (2008) An adaptive gaze stabilisation controller inspired by the vestibulo-ocular reflex. Bioinspir Biomim 3:35001PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Apps R, Garwicz M (2005) Anatomical and physiological foundations of cerebellar information processing. Nat Rev, Neurosci 6:297–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Dean P, Porrill J, Stone JV (2002) Decorrelation control by the cerebellum achieves oculomotor plant compensation in simulated vestibulo-ocular reflex. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 269:1895–1904CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Dean P, Porrill J, Stone JV (2004) Visual awareness and the cerebellum: possible role of decorrelation control. Prog Brain Res 144:61–75PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Porrill J, Dean P, Stone JV (2004) Recurrent cerebellar architecture solves the motor error problem. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 271:789–796CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Porrill J, Dean P (2008) Silent synapses, LTP and the indirect parallel-fibre pathway: computational consequences of optimal noise processing. PLoS Comput Biol 4:e1000085PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Osborne LC, Hohl SS, Bialek W, Lisberger SG (2007) Time course of precision in smooth-pursuit eye movements of monkeys. J Neurosci 27:2987–2998PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Medina JF, Lisberger SG (2007) Variation, signal, and noise in cerebellar sensory-motor processing for smooth-pursuit eye movements. J Neurosci 27:6832–6842PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Isope P, Barbour B (2002) Properties of unitary granule cell -> Purkinje cell synapses in adult rat cerebellar slices. J Neurosci 22:9668–9678PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Jörntell H, Ekerot CF (2002) Receptive field plasticity profoundly alters the cutaneous parallel fiber synaptic input to cerebellar interneurons in vivo. J Neurosci 23:9620–9631Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ekerot CF, Jorntell H (2003) Parallel fiber receptive fields: a key to understanding cerebellar operation and learning. Cerebellum 2:101–109PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Coesmans M, Weber JT, De Zeeuw CI, Hansel C (2004) Bidirectional parallel fiber plasticity in the cerebellum under climbing fiber control. Neuron 44:691–700PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Jörntell H, Hansel C (2006) Synaptic memories upside down: bidirectional plasticity at cerebellar parallel fiber-Purkinje cell synapses. Neuron 52:227–238PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Jörntell H, Ekerot CF (2002) Reciprocal bidirectional plasticity of parallel fiber receptive fields in cerebellar Purkinje cells and their afferent interneurons. Neuron 34:797–806PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Boyden ES, Raymond JL (2003) Active reversal of motor memories reveals rules governing memory encoding. Neuron 39:1031–1042PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Boyden ES, Katoh A, Raymond JL (2004) Cerebellum-dependent learning: the role of multiple plasticity mechanisms. Ann Rev Neurosci 27:581–609PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kimpo RR, Boyden ES, Katoh A, Ke MC, Raymond JL (2005) Distinct patterns of stimulus generalization of increases and decreases in VOR gain. J Neurophysiol 94:3092–3100PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Cohen MR, Meissner GW, Schafer RJ, Raymond JL (2004) Reversal of motor learning in the vestibulo-ocular reflex in the absence of visual input. Learn Mem 11:559–565PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kuki Y, Hirata Y, Blazquez PM, Heiney SA, Highstein SM (2004) Memory retention of vestibuloocular reflex motor learning in squirrel monkeys. Neurorep 15:1007–1011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kehoe EJ (2006) Repeated acquisitions and extinctions in classical conditioning of the rabbit nictitating membrane response. Learn Memory 13:366–375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Jirenhed DA, Bengtsson F, Hesslow G (2007) Acquisition, extinction, and reacquisition of a cerebellar cortical memory trace. J Neurosci 27:2493–2502PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Gomi H, Kawato M (1992) Adaptive feedback control models of the vestibulocerebellum and spinocerebellum. Biol Cybern 68:105–114PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Coenen OJMD, Sejnowski TJ (1996) Learning to make predictions in the cerebellum may explain the anticipatory modulation of the vestibulo-ocular reflex (VOR) gain with vergence. In: Proceedings of the 3rd Joint Symposium on Neural Computation, Institute of Neural Computation; 1996; University of California, San Diego, pp 202–221Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Kettner RE, Mahamud S, Leung HC, Sitkoff N, Houk JC, Peterson BW et al (1997) Prediction of complex two-dimensional trajectories by a cerebellar model of smooth pursuit eye movement. J Neurophysiol 77:2115–2130PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Schweighofer N, Spoelstra J, Arbib MA, Kawato M (1998) Role of the cerebellum in reaching movements in humans. II. A neural model of the intermediate cerebellum. Eur J Neurosci 10:95–105PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Medina JF, Nores WL, Mauk MD (2002) Inhibition of climbing fibres is a signal for the extinction of conditioned eyelid responses. Nature 416:330–333PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Yamamoto K, Kobayashi Y, Takemura A, Kawano K, Kawato M (2002) Computational studies on acquisition and adaptation of ocular following responses based on cerebellar synaptic plasticity. J Neurophysiol 87:1554–1571PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Walter JT, Khodakhah K (2006) The linear computational algorithm of cerebellar Purkinje cells. J Neurosci 26:12861–12872PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Jörntell H, Ekerot CF (2006) Properties of somatosensory synaptic integration in cerebellar granule cells in vivo. J Neurosci 26:11786–11797PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Holtzman T, Rajapaksa T, Mostofi A, Edgley SA (2006) Different responses of rat cerebellar Purkinje cells and Golgi cells evoked by widespread convergent sensory inputs. J Physiol-London 574:491–507PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Mittmann W, Hausser M (2007) Linking synaptic plasticity and spike output at excitatory and inhibitory synapses onto cerebellar Purkinje cells. J Neurosci 27:5559–5570PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    McKay BE, Engbers JD, Mehaffey WH, Gordon GR, Molineux ML, Bains JS et al (2007) Climbing fiber discharge regulates cerebellar functions by controlling the intrinsic characteristics of Purkinje cell output. J Neurophysiol 97:2590–2604PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Szapiro G, Barbour B (2007) Multiple climbing fibers signal to molecular layer interneurons exclusively via glutamate spillover. Nat Neurosci 10:735–742PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Shin SL, Hoebeek FE, Schonewille M, De Zeeuw CI, Aertsen A, De Schutter E (2007) Regular patterns in cerebellar Purkinje cell simple spike trains. PLoS ONE 2:e485PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Schonewille M, Khosrovanl S, Winkelman BHJ, Hoebeek FE, De Jeu MTG, Larsen IM et al (2006) Purkinje cells in awake behaving animals operate at the upstate membrane potential. Nat Neurosci 9:459–461PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Urbano FJ, Simpson JI, Llinas RR (2006) Somatomotor and oculomotor inferior olivary neurons have distinct electrophysiological phenotypes. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 103:16550–16555PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Psychology, University of SheffieldWestern BankSheffieldUK

Personalised recommendations