Searcharxiv⌕ Search

arXiv subjects

Britta U. Westner

Publications and source records attributed to Britta U. Westner.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Reassessing prediction in the brain: Pre-onset neural encoding during natural listening does not reflect pre-activation

Predictive processing theories propose that the brain continuously anticipates upcoming input. However, direct neural evidence for predictive pre-activation during natural language comprehension remains limited and debated. Previous studies using large language model (LLM)-based encoding models with fMRI and ECoG have reported pre-onset signals that appear to encode upcoming words, but these effects may instead reflect dependencies in the stimulus or autocorrelations in neural activity. Here, we re-examined this question by aligning LLM-derived word embeddings with neural activity recorded during naturalistic listening using magnetoencephalography (MEG) and electrocorticography (ECoG). We replicated pre-onset encoding effects previously observed in ECoG across both modalities, and found that they persist even after controlling for stimulus correlations. Crucially, temporal generalization analyses revealed no stable overlap between pre- and post-onset representations, indicating that pre-onset activity does not reflect pre-activation of the next word. Consistent with this, long-range predictive effects previously reported in fMRI did not replicate in our higher-temporal-resolution data. While we found no evidence for predictive pre-activation, we observed clear signatures of postdiction, with neural activity reflecting persistent encoding of prior words. These results suggest that reported apparent predictive signals do not reflect pre-activation of upcoming input. They call for caution in interpreting LLM-based encoding models and highlight the need for a more nuanced understanding of what constitutes "prediction" in language comprehension.

q-bio.NC↗

Cycling on the Freeway: The Perilous State of Open Source Neuroscience Software

Most scientists need software to perform their research (Barker et al., 2020; Carver et al., 2022; Hettrick, 2014; Hettrick et al., 2014; Switters and Osimo, 2019), and neuroscientists are no exception. Whether we work with reaction times, electrophysiological signals, or magnetic resonance imaging data, we rely on software to acquire, analyze, and statistically evaluate the raw data we obtain - or to generate such data if we work with simulations. In recent years there has been a shift toward relying on free, open-source scientific software (FOSSS) for neuroscience data analysis (Poldrack et al., 2019), in line with the broader open science movement in academia (McKiernan et al., 2016) and wider industry trends (Eghbal, 2016). Importantly, FOSSS is typically developed by working scientists (not professional software developers) which sets up a precarious situation given the nature of the typical academic workplace (wherein academics, especially in their early careers, are on short and fixed term contracts). In this paper, we will argue that the existing ecosystem of neuroscientific open source software is brittle, and discuss why and how the neuroscience community needs to come together to ensure a healthy growth of our software landscape to the benefit of all.

cs.CY↗