Cited by 140Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesNeural dynamics and brain functionMemory and Neural Mechanisms

Hierarchical coding for sequential task events in the monkey prefrontal cortex

Open access
Sigala, Natasha, Kusunoki, Makoto, Nimmo-Smith, Ian, Gaffan, David, Duncan, John·2008·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

The frontal lobes play a key role in sequential organization of behavior. Little is known, however, of the way frontal neurons code successive phases of a structured task plan. Using correlational analysis, we asked how a population of frontal cells represents the multiple events of a complex sequential task. Monkeys performed a conventional cue–target association task, with distinct cue, delay, and target phases. Across the population of recorded cells, we examined patterns of activity for different task phases, and in the same phase, for different stimulus objects. The results show hierarchical representation of task events. For different task phases, there were different, approximately orthogonal patterns of activity across the population of neurons. Modulations of each basic pattern encoded stimulus information within each phase. By orthogonal coding, the frontal lobe may control transitions between the discrete steps of a mental program; by correlated coding within each step, similar operations may be applied to different stimulus content.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1073/pnas.0802569105

Cites

44 of 44 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • The activity of neurons varied substantially in different trial epochs (99% of neurons, 675/681, ANOVA p<0.05).

    “Consistent with previous studies23-25, we found that the activity of neurons varied substantially in different trial epochs (99% of neurons, 675/681, ANOVA p<0.05).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 46 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sigala, N., Kusunoki, M., Nimmo-Smith, I., Gaffan, D., & Duncan, J.
Affiliations
  • MRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit (GB)
  • *Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 3UD, United Kingdom; and
  • Medical Research Council, Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, Cambridge CB2 7EF, United Kingdom
  • University of Oxford (GB)
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2008-08-19
Volume
105
Issue
33
Pages
11969-11974
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W2013122119
Cited by
140
References
46
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 8
FWCI
4.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
Keywords
hierarchical coding, prefrontal cortex, orthogonal coding, frontal lobe, sequential behavior
MeSH terms
Animals, Behavior, Animal, Macaca mulatta, Memory, Cluster Analysis, Prefrontal Cortex

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