分布式和符号计算模型揭示的阅读神经成分。

IF 3.6 Q1 LINGUISTICS
Neurobiology of Language Pub Date : 2020-01-01 Epub Date: 2020-10-01 DOI:10.1162/nol_a_00018
Ryan Staples, William W Graves
{"title":"分布式和符号计算模型揭示的阅读神经成分。","authors":"Ryan Staples,&nbsp;William W Graves","doi":"10.1162/nol_a_00018","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Determining how the cognitive components of reading - orthographic, phonological, and semantic representations - are instantiated in the brain has been a longstanding goal of psychology and human cognitive neuroscience. The two most prominent computational models of reading instantiate different cognitive processes, implying different neural processes. Artificial neural network (ANN) models of reading posit non-symbolic, distributed representations. The dual-route cascaded (DRC) model instead suggests two routes of processing, one representing symbolic rules of spelling-sound correspondence, the other representing orthographic and phonological lexicons. These models are not adjudicated by behavioral data and have never before been directly compared in terms of neural plausibility. We used representational similarity analysis to compare the predictions of these models to neural data from participants reading aloud. Both the ANN and DRC model representations corresponded with neural activity. However, ANN model representations correlated to more reading-relevant areas of cortex. When contributions from the DRC model were statistically controlled, partial correlations revealed that the ANN model accounted for significant variance in the neural data. The opposite analysis, examining the variance explained by the DRC model with contributions from the ANN model factored out, revealed no correspondence to neural activity. Our results suggest that ANNs trained using distributed representations provide a better correspondence between cognitive and neural coding. Additionally, this framework provides a principled approach for comparing computational models of cognitive function to gain insight into neural representations.</p>","PeriodicalId":34845,"journal":{"name":"Neurobiology of Language","volume":" ","pages":"381-401"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1162/nol_a_00018","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Neural Components of Reading Revealed by Distributed and Symbolic Computational Models.\",\"authors\":\"Ryan Staples,&nbsp;William W Graves\",\"doi\":\"10.1162/nol_a_00018\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Determining how the cognitive components of reading - orthographic, phonological, and semantic representations - are instantiated in the brain has been a longstanding goal of psychology and human cognitive neuroscience. The two most prominent computational models of reading instantiate different cognitive processes, implying different neural processes. Artificial neural network (ANN) models of reading posit non-symbolic, distributed representations. The dual-route cascaded (DRC) model instead suggests two routes of processing, one representing symbolic rules of spelling-sound correspondence, the other representing orthographic and phonological lexicons. These models are not adjudicated by behavioral data and have never before been directly compared in terms of neural plausibility. We used representational similarity analysis to compare the predictions of these models to neural data from participants reading aloud. Both the ANN and DRC model representations corresponded with neural activity. However, ANN model representations correlated to more reading-relevant areas of cortex. When contributions from the DRC model were statistically controlled, partial correlations revealed that the ANN model accounted for significant variance in the neural data. The opposite analysis, examining the variance explained by the DRC model with contributions from the ANN model factored out, revealed no correspondence to neural activity. Our results suggest that ANNs trained using distributed representations provide a better correspondence between cognitive and neural coding. Additionally, this framework provides a principled approach for comparing computational models of cognitive function to gain insight into neural representations.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":34845,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Neurobiology of Language\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"381-401\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1162/nol_a_00018\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Neurobiology of Language\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1162/nol_a_00018\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2020/10/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurobiology of Language","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1162/nol_a_00018","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2020/10/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

确定阅读的认知成分——正字法、语音和语义表征——是如何在大脑中实例化的,一直是心理学和人类认知神经科学的长期目标。两个最突出的阅读计算模型实例化了不同的认知过程,这意味着不同的神经过程。人工神经网络(ANN)模型的阅读posnon -symbolic, distributed representation。双路径级联(DRC)模型提出了两条处理路径,一条表示拼写-声音对应的符号规则,另一条表示正字法和音系词汇。这些模型不是由行为数据判断的,以前也从未在神经合理性方面进行过直接比较。我们使用代表性相似性分析来比较这些模型的预测与参与者大声朗读的神经数据。ANN和DRC模型的表示都与神经活动相对应。然而,人工神经网络模型表示与更多与阅读相关的皮层区域相关。当DRC模型的贡献在统计上得到控制时,部分相关性显示ANN模型在神经数据中占显著方差。相反的分析,检查DRC模型解释的方差,并将人工神经网络模型的贡献排除在外,发现与神经活动没有对应关系。我们的研究结果表明,使用分布式表示训练的人工神经网络在认知和神经编码之间提供了更好的对应关系。此外,该框架为比较认知功能的计算模型以深入了解神经表征提供了一种原则性的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Neural Components of Reading Revealed by Distributed and Symbolic Computational Models.

Neural Components of Reading Revealed by Distributed and Symbolic Computational Models.

Neural Components of Reading Revealed by Distributed and Symbolic Computational Models.

Neural Components of Reading Revealed by Distributed and Symbolic Computational Models.

Determining how the cognitive components of reading - orthographic, phonological, and semantic representations - are instantiated in the brain has been a longstanding goal of psychology and human cognitive neuroscience. The two most prominent computational models of reading instantiate different cognitive processes, implying different neural processes. Artificial neural network (ANN) models of reading posit non-symbolic, distributed representations. The dual-route cascaded (DRC) model instead suggests two routes of processing, one representing symbolic rules of spelling-sound correspondence, the other representing orthographic and phonological lexicons. These models are not adjudicated by behavioral data and have never before been directly compared in terms of neural plausibility. We used representational similarity analysis to compare the predictions of these models to neural data from participants reading aloud. Both the ANN and DRC model representations corresponded with neural activity. However, ANN model representations correlated to more reading-relevant areas of cortex. When contributions from the DRC model were statistically controlled, partial correlations revealed that the ANN model accounted for significant variance in the neural data. The opposite analysis, examining the variance explained by the DRC model with contributions from the ANN model factored out, revealed no correspondence to neural activity. Our results suggest that ANNs trained using distributed representations provide a better correspondence between cognitive and neural coding. Additionally, this framework provides a principled approach for comparing computational models of cognitive function to gain insight into neural representations.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Neurobiology of Language
Neurobiology of Language Social Sciences-Linguistics and Language
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
6.20%
发文量
32
审稿时长
17 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信