Back

Preserved geometry during representational drift enables stable perception and memory

Zaid, H.; Schaffer, E. S.

2026-06-28 neuroscience
10.64898/2026.06.25.734656 bioRxiv
Show abstract

In many brain regions, the stimulus tuning of neurons is stable on a timescale of hours but not on a timescale of weeks, a phenomenon often called representational drift. This would seem to imply that these brain regions cannot be used for stable recognition of sensory stimuli or the retrieval of associative memories learned several weeks prior. However, decoding approaches have demonstrated that in some cases, stable decoding of drifting representations is possible. In principle, adaptive decoding provides a plausible resolution to the paradox of how the brain operates with drifting representations, but we lack a deep understanding of what the requirements are for stable decoding to be possible. Here, we offer a general mathematical framework that explains when and why stable decoding from a drifting representation can be achieved. First, we demonstrate that both feedforward and recurrent networks preserve the geometry of their inputs when the network is sufficiently large, meaning that representational drift must also preserve geometry in these networks. Second, we demonstrate that drifting representations that have stable geometry are decodable with adaptive decoders. Therefore, not only the existence of preserved geometry in the presence of representational drift but also the ability to decode from drifting representations simply requires the population of neurons exhibiting representational drift to be large. This theoretical framework not only suggests that preserved geometry should be a general feature of drifting representations, it also explains the conditions under which empirical efforts to measure stable geometry will be successful.

Matching journals

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

1
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2444 papers in training set
Top 1%
15.2%
2
PLOS Computational Biology
1863 papers in training set
Top 2%
12.8%
3
eLife
5828 papers in training set
Top 12%
8.0%
4
Nature Communications
5641 papers in training set
Top 23%
6.8%
5
Nature Neuroscience
252 papers in training set
Top 1%
5.5%
6
Neural Computation
39 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
4.9%
50% of probability mass above
7
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 32%
4.4%
8
Biological Cybernetics
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.3%
9
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 33%
3.3%
10
The Journal of Neuroscience
1025 papers in training set
Top 6%
2.7%
11
Journal of Neurophysiology
302 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.5%
12
Neuron
337 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.3%
13
Neural Networks
35 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.3%
14
Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
60 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.1%
15
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience
135 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.1%
16
Physical Review Research
49 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.1%
17
Journal of Computational Neuroscience
29 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.1%
18
Cerebral Cortex
396 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.1%
19
Physical Review E
112 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.1%
20
Frontiers in Neural Circuits
43 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.0%
21
Hippocampus
56 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.0%
22
eneuro
439 papers in training set
Top 7%
1.0%
23
European Journal of Neuroscience
189 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.0%
24
Psychological Review
19 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.0%
25
PLOS Biology
486 papers in training set
Top 11%
0.9%
26
Science Advances
1243 papers in training set
Top 30%
0.9%
27
Network Neuroscience
126 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
28
Cell Reports
1498 papers in training set
Top 29%
0.6%
29
Journal of Vision
110 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.6%