Combining Repetition Suppression and Pattern Analysis Provides New Insights into the Role of M1 and Parietal Areas in Skilled Sequential Actions
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
How does the brain change during learning? In functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies, both multivariate pattern analysis (MVPA) and repetition suppression (RS) have been used to detect changes in neuronal representations. In the context of motor sequence learning, the two techniques have provided discrepant findings: pattern analysis showed that only premotor and parietal regions, but not primary motor cortex (M1), develop a representation of trained sequences. In contrast, RS suggested trained sequence representations in all these regions. Here, we applied both analysis techniques to a five-week finger sequence training study, in which participants executed each sequence twice before switching to a different sequence. Both RS and pattern analysis indicated learning-related changes for parietal areas, but only RS showed a difference between trained and untrained sequences in M1. A more fine-grained analysis, however, revealed that the RS effect in M1 reflects a fundamentally different process than in parietal areas. On the first execution, M1 represents especially the first finger of each sequence, likely reflecting preparatory processes. This effect dramatically reduces during the second execution. In contrast, parietal areas represent the identity of a sequence, and this representation stays relatively stable on the second execution. These results suggest that the RS effect does not reflect a trained sequence representation in M1, but rather a preparatory signal for movement initiation. More generally, our study demonstrates that across regions RS can reflect different representational changes in the neuronal population code, emphasizing the importance of combining pattern analysis and RS techniques. <b>SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT</b> Previous studies using pattern analysis have suggested that primary motor cortex (M1) does not represent learnt sequential actions. However, a study using repetition suppression (RS) has reported M1 changes during motor sequence learning. Combining both techniques, we first replicate the discrepancy between them, with learning-related changes in M1 in RS, but not pattern dissimilarities. We further analyzed the representational changes with repetition, and found that the RS effects differ across regions. M19s activity represents the starting finger of the sequence, an effect that vanishes with repetition. In contrast, activity patterns in parietal areas exhibit sequence dependency, which persists with repetition. These results demonstrate the importance of combining RS and pattern analysis to understand the function of brain regions.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».