Working memory expands shared task representations in cortex
Diamanti, E.; Pinto, L.; Schottdorf, M.; Russo, A. A.; Thiberge, S. Y.; Brody, C. D.; Tank, D. W.
Show abstract
Cognition is thought to emerge from the flexible organization of neural activity, yet how this organization reconfigures across behaviors varying in cognitive load remains unclear. We investigated how the structure of working-memory representations in the cortex compares to task representations that do not involve working memory. We used a task-switching paradigm in virtual reality, where mice alternated between a navigation-based working-memory task and a simpler task with matched sensorimotor demands. During behavior, we simultaneously imaged three cortical areas: higher visual area AM, and two association areas--premotor (M2) and retrosplenial cortex. At the single-neuron level, trial-averaged activity appeared similar across tasks. However, pairwise correlations decreased during the working-memory task, particularly in association areas. In addition, the corresponding linear task subspace explained the variance of both tasks equally well, whereas the simpler task subspace failed to do so, suggesting an asymmetric relationship between them. Nonlinear dimensionality reduction revealed a shared low-dimensional structure across tasks. Yet, the organization of neuronal firing fields along this shared structure accounted for the difference in pairwise correlations: in the working-memory task, firing fields were more disjoint, especially among neurons in association areas that formed sequences along the memory dimension. Moreover, the degree of overlap between these firing fields predicted the mices behavioral reliance on working memory. We conclude that behaviors varying in cognitive demands are supported by a single low-dimensional neural structure, which can expand or contract depending on cognitive load. We thus provide a framework for how task representations across the cortex reconfigure to support cognitive processes.
Matching journals
The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.