Combining Repetition Suppression and Pattern Analysis Provides New Insights into the Role of M1 and Parietal Areas in Skilled Sequential Actions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".