Study identifies where thoughts of familiar objects occur
inside the human brain
Date: Fri, 4 January 2008
A team of Carnegie Mellon University computer scientists
and cognitive neuroscientists, combining methods of machine learning and brain
imaging, have found a way to identify where people's thoughts and perceptions of
familiar objects originate in the brain by identifying the patterns of brain
activity associated with the objects. An article in the Jan. 2 issue of PLoS
One discusses this new method, which was developed over two years under the
leadership of neuroscientist Professor Marcel Just and Computer Science
Professor Tom M. Mitchell.
A dozen study participants enveloped in an MRI
scanner were shown line drawings of ten different objects - five tools and five
dwellings -one at a time and asked to think about their properties. Just and
Mitchell's method was able to accurately determine which of the ten drawings a
participant was viewing based on their characteristic whole-brain neural
activation patterns. To make the task more challenging for themselves, the
researchers excluded information in the brain's visual cortex, where raw visual
information is available, and focused more on the 'thinking' parts of the
brain.
The scientists found that the activation pattern evoked by an
object wasn't located in just one place in the brain. For instance, thinking
about a hammer activated many locations. How you swing a hammer activated the
motor area, while what a hammer is used for, and the shape of a hammer activated
other areas.
According to Just and Mitchell, this is the first study to
report the ability to identify the thought process associated with a single
object. While earlier work showed it is possible to distinguish broad categories
of objects such as 'tools' versus 'buildings,' this new research shows that it
is possible to distinguish between items with very similar meanings, like two
different tools. The machine-learning method involves training a computer
algorithm (a set of mathematical rules) to extract the patterns from a
participant's brain activation, using data collected in one part of the study,
and then testing the algorithm on data in an independent part of the same study.
In this way, the algorithm is never previously exposed to the patterns on which
it is tested.
Another important question addressed by the study was
whether different brains exhibit the same or different activity patterns to
encode these individual objects. To answer this question, the researchers tried
identifying objects represented in one participant's brain after training their
algorithms using data collected from other participants. They found that the
algorithm was indeed able to identify a participant's thoughts based on the
patterns extracted from the other participants.
"This part of the study
establishes, as never before, that there is a commonality in how different
people's brains represent the same object," said Mitchell, head of the Machine
Learning Department in Carnegie Mellon's School of Computer Science and a
pioneer in applying machine learning methods to the study of brain activity.
"There has always been a philosophical conundrum as to whether one person's
perception of the color blue is the same as another person's. Now we see that
there is a great deal of commonality across different people's brain activity
corresponding to familiar tools and dwellings."
"This first step using
computer algorithms to identify thoughts of individual objects from brain
activity can open new scientific paths, and eventually roads and highways,"
added Svetlana Shinkareva, an assistant professor of psychology at the
University of South Carolina who is the study's lead author. "We hope to
progress to identifying the thoughts associated not just with pictures, but also
with words, and eventually sentences."
Just, who directs the Center for
Cognitive Brain Imaging at Carnegie Mellon, noted that one application the team
is excited about is comparing the activation patterns of people with
neurological disorders, such as autism. "We are looking forward to determining
how people with autism neurally represent social concepts such as friend and
happy," he said. Just also is developing a brain-based theory of autism. "People
with autism perceive others in a distinctive way that has been difficult to
characterize," he explained. "This machine learning approach offers a way to
discover that characterization."
Source: Carnegie Mellon
University