Earl K. Miller

Nathan Cloos, Moufan Li, Markus Siegel et al.

How do we know if two systems - biological or artificial - process information in a similar way? Similarity measures such as linear regression, Centered Kernel Alignment (CKA), Normalized Bures Similarity (NBS), and angular Procrustes distance, are often used to quantify this similarity. However, it is currently unclear what drives high similarity scores and even what constitutes a "good" score. Here, we introduce a novel tool to investigate these questions by differentiating through similarity measures to directly maximize the score. Surprisingly, we find that high similarity scores do not guarantee encoding task-relevant information in a manner consistent with neural data; and this is particularly acute for CKA and even some variations of cross-validated and regularized linear regression. We find no consistent threshold for a good similarity score - it depends on both the measure and the dataset. In addition, synthetic datasets optimized to maximize similarity scores initially learn the highest variance principal component of the target dataset, but some methods like angular Procrustes capture lower variance dimensions much earlier than methods like CKA. To shed light on this, we mathematically derive the sensitivity of CKA, angular Procrustes, and NBS to the variance of principal component dimensions, and explain the emphasis CKA places on high variance components. Finally, by jointly optimizing multiple similarity measures, we characterize their allowable ranges and reveal that some similarity measures are more constraining than others. While current measures offer a seemingly straightforward way to quantify the similarity between neural systems, our work underscores the need for careful interpretation. We hope the tools we developed will be used by practitioners to better understand current and future similarity measures.

Natalie Klein, Josue Orellana, Scott Brincat et al.

Angular measurements are often modeled as circular random variables, where there are natural circular analogues of moments, including correlation. Because a product of circles is a torus, a d-dimensional vector of circular random variables lies on a d-dimensional torus. For such vectors we present here a class of graphical models, which we call torus graphs, based on the full exponential family with pairwise interactions. The topological distinction between a torus and Euclidean space has several important consequences. Our development was motivated by the problem of identifying phase coupling among oscillatory signals recorded from multiple electrodes in the brain: oscillatory phases across electrodes might tend to advance or recede together, indicating coordination across brain areas. The data analyzed here consisted of 24 phase angles measured repeatedly across 840 experimental trials (replications) during a memory task, where the electrodes were in 4 distinct brain regions, all known to be active while memories are being stored or retrieved. In realistic numerical simulations, we found that a standard pairwise assessment, known as phase locking value, is unable to describe multivariate phase interactions, but that torus graphs can accurately identify conditional associations. Torus graphs generalize several more restrictive approaches that have appeared in various scientific literatures, and produced intuitive results in the data we analyzed. Torus graphs thus unify multivariate analysis of circular data and present fertile territory for future research.