Abstract:Biological neurons receive thousands of synaptic inputs on branching, electrically excitable dendrites, yet population activity is often modeled with direct input-output rules in which each input contributes independently to a scalar drive. We study what successful prediction by such models does, and does not, reveal about neural computation. For conditional maximum-entropy models that match output rates and pairwise output-input coactivities, the entropy explained by a direct model is a prediction measure under the sampled input distribution, not a mechanism-identification test. A restricted MaxEnt fit is an information projection: omitted interaction, temporal, or hidden-state terms can be absorbed into fitted first-order parameters whenever they are correlated with the included sufficient statistics. For sparse correlated binary inputs, this absorption has an explicit coskewness form. We introduce diagnostics that separate in-distribution prediction from recovery of the response rule: state reweighting that holds P(y|x) fixed while changing P(x), conditional log-odds contrasts for local additivity, and temporal leakage controls. In ground-truth simulations, purely higher-order responses can pass first-order entropy and raw coactivity tests under leakage-prone sampling, but are correctly classified after reweighting. Applied to selected, leakage-enriched local tables from CA1 hippocampal recordings, approximately half of tables that appear first-order under empirical weights become distribution-sensitive under balanced reweighting, far above a matched additive-surrogate null. Thus direct entropy-explained fractions and raw coactivity predictions should be interpreted as predictions under the observed state distribution, not as evidence that mechanisms outside the direct model are absent or small.
From: Houman Safaai [view email]
[v1]
Mon, 1 Jun 2026 04:15:49 UTC (520 KB)