Cargando…

Variation in Event-Related Potentials by State Transitions

The probability of an event's occurrence affects event-related potentials (ERPs) on electroencephalograms. The relation between probability and potentials has been discussed by using a quantity called surprise that represents the self-information that humans receive from the event. Previous stu...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Higashi, Hiroshi, Minami, Tetsuto, Nakauchi, Shigeki
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5326784/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28289380
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2017.00075
_version_ 1782510598255280128
author Higashi, Hiroshi
Minami, Tetsuto
Nakauchi, Shigeki
author_facet Higashi, Hiroshi
Minami, Tetsuto
Nakauchi, Shigeki
author_sort Higashi, Hiroshi
collection PubMed
description The probability of an event's occurrence affects event-related potentials (ERPs) on electroencephalograms. The relation between probability and potentials has been discussed by using a quantity called surprise that represents the self-information that humans receive from the event. Previous studies have estimated surprise based on the probability distribution in a stationary state. Our hypothesis is that state transitions also play an important role in the estimation of surprise. In this study, we compare the effects of surprise on the ERPs based on two models that generate an event sequence: a model of a stationary state and a model with state transitions. To compare these effects, we generate the event sequences with Markov chains to avoid a situation that the state transition probability converges with the stationary probability by the accumulation of the event observations. Our trial-by-trial model-based analysis showed that the stationary probability better explains the P3b component and the state transition probability better explains the P3a component. The effect on P3a suggests that the internal model, which is constantly and automatically generated by the human brain to estimate the probability distribution of the events, approximates the model with state transitions because Bayesian surprise, which represents the degree of updating of the internal model, is highly reflected in P3a. The global effect reflected in P3b, however, may not be related to the internal model because P3b depends on the stationary probability distribution. The results suggest that an internal model can represent state transitions and the global effect is generated by a different mechanism than the one for forming the internal model.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5326784
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-53267842017-03-13 Variation in Event-Related Potentials by State Transitions Higashi, Hiroshi Minami, Tetsuto Nakauchi, Shigeki Front Hum Neurosci Neuroscience The probability of an event's occurrence affects event-related potentials (ERPs) on electroencephalograms. The relation between probability and potentials has been discussed by using a quantity called surprise that represents the self-information that humans receive from the event. Previous studies have estimated surprise based on the probability distribution in a stationary state. Our hypothesis is that state transitions also play an important role in the estimation of surprise. In this study, we compare the effects of surprise on the ERPs based on two models that generate an event sequence: a model of a stationary state and a model with state transitions. To compare these effects, we generate the event sequences with Markov chains to avoid a situation that the state transition probability converges with the stationary probability by the accumulation of the event observations. Our trial-by-trial model-based analysis showed that the stationary probability better explains the P3b component and the state transition probability better explains the P3a component. The effect on P3a suggests that the internal model, which is constantly and automatically generated by the human brain to estimate the probability distribution of the events, approximates the model with state transitions because Bayesian surprise, which represents the degree of updating of the internal model, is highly reflected in P3a. The global effect reflected in P3b, however, may not be related to the internal model because P3b depends on the stationary probability distribution. The results suggest that an internal model can represent state transitions and the global effect is generated by a different mechanism than the one for forming the internal model. Frontiers Media S.A. 2017-02-27 /pmc/articles/PMC5326784/ /pubmed/28289380 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2017.00075 Text en Copyright © 2017 Higashi, Minami and Nakauchi. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Neuroscience
Higashi, Hiroshi
Minami, Tetsuto
Nakauchi, Shigeki
Variation in Event-Related Potentials by State Transitions
title Variation in Event-Related Potentials by State Transitions
title_full Variation in Event-Related Potentials by State Transitions
title_fullStr Variation in Event-Related Potentials by State Transitions
title_full_unstemmed Variation in Event-Related Potentials by State Transitions
title_short Variation in Event-Related Potentials by State Transitions
title_sort variation in event-related potentials by state transitions
topic Neuroscience
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5326784/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28289380
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2017.00075
work_keys_str_mv AT higashihiroshi variationineventrelatedpotentialsbystatetransitions
AT minamitetsuto variationineventrelatedpotentialsbystatetransitions
AT nakauchishigeki variationineventrelatedpotentialsbystatetransitions