Cited by 83Visual perception and processing mechanismsNeural dynamics and brain functionNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

A neural mechanism for terminating decisions

Open access
Stine, Gabriel M., Trautmann, Eric M., Jeurissen, Danique, Shadlen, Michael N.·2023·Neuron

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

The brain makes decisions by accumulating evidence until there is enough to stop and choose. Neural mechanisms of evidence accumulation are established in association cortex, but the site and mechanism of termination are unknown. Here, we show that the superior colliculus (SC) plays a causal role in terminating decisions, and we provide evidence for a mechanism by which this occurs. We recorded simultaneously from neurons in the lateral intraparietal area (LIP) and SC while monkeys made perceptual decisions. Despite similar trial-averaged activity, we found distinct single-trial dynamics in the two areas: LIP displayed drift-diffusion dynamics and SC displayed bursting dynamics. We hypothesized that the bursts manifest a threshold mechanism applied to signals represented in LIP to terminate the decision. Consistent with this hypothesis, SC inactivation produced behavioral effects diagnostic of an impaired threshold sensor and prolonged the buildup of activity in LIP. The results reveal the transformation from deliberation to commitment.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neuron.2023.05.028

Cites

78 of 82 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A single latent variable dominating population dimensionality during the choice period may reflect a linearly increasing decision variable (DV) that is reset at the end of epoch 4 when the decision is reached and executed.

    “Thus, a single latent variable dominating population dimensionality during choice period (Fig. 2M) may reflect a linearly increasing DV that is reset at the end of epoch 4 when the decision is reached and executed (50).”

    From Neural correlates of perceptual decision-making in the primary somatosensory cortex (2026) · cites this paper as [50]

    The Results section ('Single-trial analyses reveal different dynamical processes in LIP and SC'; page not available) describes ramp-like, trial-averaged LIP activity and identifies single-trial activity with a decision variable. The Discussion says an SC threshold mechanism generates a saccade and terminates the decision. Our copy does not establish that the decision variable resets when the decision is executed; it also does not connect that mechanism to the citing paper’s single latent variable or epoch 4. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The factors that determine when to stop gathering information and commit to a final decision, as well as which options to sample from, remain an active area of investigation.

    “the factors that determine when to stop gathering information and commit to a final decision, as well as which options to sample from, remain an active area of investigation1,4,9–11.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [22]Trautmann EM, Hesse JK, Stine GM, Xia R, Zhu S, O’Shea DJ, Karsh B, Colonell J, Lanfranchi FF, Vyas S, (2023). Large-scale brain-wide neural recording in nonhuman primates. Preprint at bioRxiv. 10.1101/2023.02.01.526664. PMC12229894 40551025 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Stine, G. M., Trautmann, E. M., Jeurissen, D., & Shadlen, M. N.
Affiliations
  • McGovern Institute for Brain Research (US)
  • Mortimer B. Zuckerman Mind Brain Behavior Institute (US)
  • Howard Hughes Medical Institute (US)
Corresponding author
Shadlen, Michael N.
Venue
Neuron
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2023-08
Volume
111
Issue
16
Pages
2601-2613.e5
ISSN
0896-6273 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4381687225
Cited by
83
References
77
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 29 · 2024: 26 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 3
FWCI
11.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Neuron (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Howard Hughes Medical Institute
  • Brain and Behavior Research Foundation
  • Simons Foundation
  • National Institutes of Health (T32 grant, R01‐grant)
  • N. Bud Grossman Center for Memory Research and Care
  • National Eye Institute (EY 013933, T32EY013933, F31EY032791, P30EY019007)
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (R01NS113113)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
evidence accumulation, superior colliculus, lateral intraparietal area, drift-diffusion model, neuronal bursting, decision threshold, perceptual decision making, sensorimotor integration, neural inactivation, decision commitment
MeSH terms
Animals, Cerebral Cortex, Decision Making, Macaca mulatta, Neurons

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review