[SOUND].

Okay, so we discuss the perceptual

decisions of monkeys.
Can we also explain perceptual decisions
of humans?
Imagine that you have to make a perceptual
decision, whether you see a house or a
face.
We can also apply the same diffusion
mechanism,
and the fusion model that explains a
perceptual decision.
So, imagine that certain photographs are
projected
onto your retina, this information goes
through
your visual cortex, and perhaps around
house
detectors, and face detectors in the
brain.
Imagine there's always a decision making
area,
that simply compares the activity of the.
House detectors and face detectors.
And if activity A is larger than activity
B, I see the
house, and if activity B is larger than A,
I see the face.
So, this is the same diffusion process
that can, perhaps, explain also our
perceptual decisions.
So, we, we can, indeed, create this task.
When we expose our subjects to faces and
houses, and sometimes they
are clear faces, clear houses and
sometimes they see a very ambiguous
information.
So we can actually ask our subjects in
the Effem race counter to make perceptual
decisions.
In the real study, [UNKNOWN] conducted
pure neuron, varying
size of study using quite noisy stimuli,
so he presented.
Quite noisy face quite noisy houses and
sometimes you actually can see quite
clearly face or house, but sometimes it's
really difficult to recognize face and
house.
So sometimes he creates a conflict so
sometimes you can be confused whether
that you see a face or house it can be
quite difficult perceptual decision.
Well sometimes there's no conflict.
There's a clear simple perceptual decision
task.
So, we indeed can finally bring face and
house detectors.
So, how can [UNKNOWN] actually used the
diffusion model, to explain our perceptual
decisions.
So, he actually suggested that there are
house detectors and face
detectors, and they are activated when we
see the ambiguous pictures.
And there is a decision making area in the
brain, and activity of this area
is simply proportional to the difference
in the
activity of the house detectors and face
detectors.
So, if the activity of the house detector
is larger than
the activity in the face detectors, we
decide that we see houses.
If activity of the face detectors is
larger than the
activity of the house detectors, we decide
that we see faces.
So, let's take a look to the actual data.
We indeed can find face and house
detectors in the brain.
So, green color indicates brain areas that
are sensitive for houses.
Red color indicates the area that is
sensitive for faces.
So, if you would make a look to the graph,
you will see that activity
in this region, really is proportional,
for example,
to the amount of facial information, the
stimuli.
So, face responsive brain area, shows a
maximum response to the clear faces.
And the smaller responses in other
conditions, when
there is less facial information in the
stimuli.
And you also see here clearly, that house
responsive area produces
activity proportional to the amount of
house information in the, stimuli.
So we do find in the brain the face and
house detectors.
Can we also find the decision making
neuron integrator that
simply compares sensor evidences for
houses and for faces.
And indeed we can find this area in the
dorsal lateral prefrontal cortex.
So, activities in the dorsal lateral
prefrontal cortex is proportional.
There was a difference in the activities
in
faces of house detectors, so this is an
integrator.
This is a brain area that integrates
information from face detectors and house
detectors.
Interestingly, the activity of this brain
area
correlated with the individual performance
of the subjects.
The more this area was activated, the
better was the performance.
So activity in dorsolateral prefrontal
cortex, is proportional to the
difference in the activity of the face and
the house detectors.
And actually activity in the
dorsolateral prefrontal cortex predicts
behavioral responses.
So, it looks like this brain area, simply
can compare
outputs from the detectors, from the house
detectors and phase detectors.
So we can also apply the same diffusion
mechanism to our perceptual decisions.
So, once again, this relatively simple
model also
help us to understand different aspects of
the decisions.
So, for example, biases, biases, this
model will
be the different starting point for the
diffusion process.
So we can also model their deepness of the
processing of the information.
That will be indicated by the drift rate,
by their speed
of accumulation of the information, at the
rate of diffusion process.
So the very interesting study was
conducted under Research Group Ohio
Kahiki.
The presented dynamic, noisy, pictures of
faces and
cars and subjects, performed at perceptual
categorization task.
So, actually the dorsal dorsolateral
prefrontal cortex, in
some subjects was inhibited by
transcranial magnetic stimulation.
So overall, this experiment shows, that
indeed
it increased the reaction time for the
decisions.
On the other hand, the modeling of the
results showed, that transuranium magnetic
stimulation of the dorsalateral prefrontal
cortex, affected
the drift rate of the diffusion process.
So, with this model we can actually link
the dorsalateral and
prefrontal cortex, to the accumulation of
the evidences for certain decisions.
So, the diffusion model, is the most
powerful model in neuroeconomics.
This model suggests that brain monitors,
the difference is
for evidence is for alternatives, and
whenever this difference reaches
this threshold, when there activity of the
decision making
neurons, firing grade reaches this
threshold, the decision is finalized.
It looks like the neuronal system, our
brain
actually makes this calculations similar
to the diffusion process.
So, diffusion model is only one model from
a cluster of models called sequential
sampling models.
Currently, I think this is the most
popular model, and there are striking
evidences that brain actually, makes
these diffusion kind of calculations
during the decision making process.
[SOUND]