Back

Sparse Stimulus Generation Improves Reverse Correlation Efficiency and Interpretability

Gargano, J. A.; Rice, A.; Chari, D. A.; Parrell, B.; Lammert, A. C.

2026-03-26 neuroscience
10.64898/2026.03.24.714012 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Reverse correlation is a widely-used and well-established method for probing latent perceptual representations in which subjects render subjective preference responses to ambiguous stimuli. Stimuli are purposefully designed to have no direct relationship with the target representation (e.g., they are randomly-generated), a property which makes each individual stimulus minimally informative toward reconstructing the target, and often difficult to interpret for subjects. As a result, a large number of stimulus-response pairs must be gathered from a given subject in order for reconstructions to be of sufficient quality, making the task fatiguing. Recent work has demonstrated that the number of trials needed can be substantially reduced using a compressive sensing framework that incorporates the assumption that the target representation can be sparsely represented in some basis into the reconstruction process. Here, we introduce an alternative method that incorporates the sparsity assumption directly into stimulus generation, which holds promise not only for improving efficiency, but also for improving the interpretability of stimuli from subjects perspective. We develop this new method as a mathematical variation of the compressive sensing approach, before conducting one simulation study and two human subjects experiments to assess the benefits of this method to reconstruction quality, sample size efficiency, and subjective interpretability. Results show that sparse stimulus generation improves all three of these areas relative to conventional reverse correlation approaches, and also relative to compressive sensing in most conditions.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 14%
14.3%
2
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 2%
14.3%
3
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 7%
10.0%
4
NeuroImage
813 papers in training set
Top 2%
6.3%
5
Frontiers in Neuroscience
223 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
4.8%
6
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 26%
3.6%
50% of probability mass above
7
IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering
38 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
3.6%
8
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 20%
3.6%
9
Journal of Neuroscience Methods
106 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
3.1%
10
Imaging Neuroscience
242 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.7%
11
Journal of Neural Engineering
197 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
2.1%
12
Physical Review E
95 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.5%
13
Journal of Vision
92 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.5%
14
Neural Networks
32 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.3%
15
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 55%
1.3%
16
IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging
18 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.3%
17
IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering
40 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.3%
18
Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
53 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.2%
19
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
67 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
20
Human Brain Mapping
295 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
21
Biomedical Optics Express
84 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.9%
22
Biophysical Journal
545 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.8%
23
IEEE Access
31 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.8%
24
Neuroscience of Consciousness
12 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.7%
25
Journal of The Royal Society Interface
189 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.7%
26
Neural Computation
36 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.7%
27
Behavior Research Methods
25 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.7%
28
Optics Express
23 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.6%