Cited by 25Visual perception and processing mechanismsNeural Networks and ApplicationsNeural dynamics and brain function

Deep gated Hebbian predictive coding accounts for emergence of complex neural response properties along the visual cortical hierarchy

Open access
Dora, Shirin, Bohte, Sander M., Pennartz, Cyriel M. A.·2021·Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Abstract Predictive coding provides a computational paradigm for modelling perceptual processing as the construction of representations accounting for causes of sensory inputs. Here, we develop a scalable, deep predictive coding network that is trained using a Hebbian learning rule. Without a priori constraints that would force model neurons to respond like biological neurons, the model exhibits properties similar to those reported in experimental studies. We analyze low- and high-level properties such as orientation selectivity, object selectivity and sparseness of neuronal populations in the model. As reported experimentally, image selectivity increases systematically across ascending areas in the model hierarchy. A further emergent network property is that representations for different object classes become more distinguishable from lower to higher areas. Thus, deep predictive coding networks can be effectively trained using biologically plausible principles and exhibit emergent properties that have been experimentally identified along the visual cortical hierarchy. Significance Statement Understanding brain mechanisms of perception requires a computational approach based on neurobiological principles. Many deep learning architectures are trained by supervised learning from large sets of labeled data, whereas biological brains must learn from unlabeled sensory inputs. We developed a Predictive Coding methodology for building scalable networks that mimic deep sensory cortical hierarchies, perform inference on the causes of sensory inputs and are trained by unsupervised, Hebbian learning. The network models are well-behaved in that they faithfully reproduce visual images based on high-level, latent representations. When ascending the sensory hierarchy, we find increasing image selectivity, sparseness and generalizability for object classification. These models show how a complex neuronal phenomenology emerges from biologically plausible, deep networks for unsupervised perceptual representation.

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 · 10.3389/fncom.2021.666131

Cites

90 of 90 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?

  • In RPT, stage 4 attended stimuli lead to deep, global recurrent processing reaching higher levels including prefrontal and executive areas, providing contents accessible to executive systems (AC in addition to PC), for use in working memory, reports, and other behavioral responses, i.e., ignition in GNWT.

    “Stage 4 Given sufficient time, attended stimuli lead to deep, global recurrent processing (Figure 3D), 27,102,105 reaching higher levels, including prefrontal, executive areas, providing contents accessible to the brain's executive systems (AC in addition to PC), for use in, e.g., working memory, reports, and other behavioral responses, i.e., ''ignition'' in GNWT (see above).”

    From An integrative, multiscale view on neural theories of consciousness (2024) · cites this paper as [105]

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 1 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • NREP has provided computational network models based on sensory cortical hierarchies, which illustrate several integrative processes operating at the level of specific image representation, view-invariant object representation, figure-ground segmentation during ego- and object-motion, and predictive cross-modal interactions.

    “NREP has provided computational network models based on sensory cortical hierarchies, which illustrate several integrative processes operating at the level of specific image representation, view-invariant object representation, figure-ground segmentation during ego- and object-motion, and predictive cross-modal interactions (Brucklacher et al., 2023; Brucklacher, Pezzulo, et al., 2025; Dora et al.”

    From Integrated information and predictive processing theories of consciousness: An adversarial collaborative review (2026) · cites this paper as Dora et al., 2021

    Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Following this strategy, researchers have demonstrated, for instance, the neurobiological plausibility of predictive processing-based representational models in spiking neural networks, and reproduced the increase in population sparsity and single-neuron image selectivity observed when ascending the visual cortical hierarchy.

    “Following this strategy, researchers have demonstrated, for instance, the neurobiological plausibility of predictive processing-based representational models in spiking neural networks (Lee et al., 2024), and reproduced the increase in population sparsity and singleneuron image selectivity observed when ascending the visual cortical hierarchy (Dora et al., 2021).”
  • Numerous experimental results support RPT, e.g., from masking, change blindness, inattention, attentional blink, neglect, and extinction, but do not exclude other theories.

    “Numerous experimental results support RPT, e.g., from masking, change blindness, inattention, attentional blink, neglect, and extinction, 8,101,102,105 but do not exclude other theories.”

    From An integrative, multiscale view on neural theories of consciousness (2024) · cites this paper as [105]

    The Introduction discusses experimental evidence for predictive coding, not evidence supporting recurrent processing theory (RPT). Searches for masking, change blindness, inattention, attentional blink, neglect, extinction, and comparisons with other theories found no passage addressing the attributed claim; the References have no page number in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The late positivity (LP) ERP wave (P300/P3b) shows characteristics of stage 4 and may thus reflect AC, in agreement with GNWT.

    “The late (300 ms) positivity (LP) ERP wave (P300/ P3b 29 ) shows characteristics of stage 4 and may thus reflect AC (Figure 3D), 102,105 in agreement with GNWT.28”

    From An integrative, multiscale view on neural theories of consciousness (2024) · cites this paper as [105]

    The Results and Materials and Methods describe areas of a visual predictive-coding model, not stages of conscious access. Searches for late positivity, P300/P3b, ERP, and global neuronal workspace theory found no passage in our copy linking the ERP wave to stage 4 or AC. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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. Pennartz C. M. A. (2015). The Brains Representational Power. Cambridge, MA: The MIT press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dora, S., Bohte, S. M., & Pennartz, C. M. A.
Affiliations
  • University of Ulster (GB)
  • University of Amsterdam (NL)
Corresponding author
Dora, Shirin
Venue
Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
Published
2021-07-28
Volume
15
Pages
666131-666131
ISSN
1662-5188 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3184778028
Cited by
24
References
90
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2
FWCI
1.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Centrum Wiskunde & Informatica (CWI), the national research institute for mathematics and computer science in the Netherlands (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Informationszentrum Lebenswissenschaften (ZB MED) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Ulster University Research Portal (Ulster University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Horizon 2020 Framework Programme (785907, 945539)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Neural Networks and Applications
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
Keywords
predictive coding, deep neural network, visual cortex, cortical hierarchy, orientation selectivity, object selectivity, feedback connectivity, latent representations, image reconstruction, regularization

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