A robust role for motor cortex.

The role of motor cortex in non-primate mammals remains unclear. More than a century of stimulation, anatomical and electrophysiological studies has implicated neural activity in this region with all kinds of movement. However, following the removal of motor cortex, rats retain most of their adaptive behaviors, including previously learned skilled movements. Here we revisit these two conflicting views of motor cortex and present a new behavior assay, challenging animals to respond to unexpected situations while navigating a dynamic obstacle course. Surprisingly, rats with motor cortical lesions show clear impairments facing an unexpected collapse of the obstacles, while showing no impairment with repeated trials in many motor and cognitive metrics of performance. We propose a new role for motor cortex: extending the robustness of sub-cortical movement systems, specifically to unexpected situations demanding rapid motor responses adapted to environmental context. The implications of this idea for current and future research are discussed.

Synaptic plasticity as Bayesian inference.

Learning, especially rapid learning, is critical for survival. However, learning is hard; a large number of synaptic weights must be set based on noisy, often ambiguous, sensory information. In such a high-noise regime, keeping track of probability distributions over weights is the optimal strategy. Here we hypothesize that synapses take that strategy; in essence, when they estimate weights, they include error bars. They then use that uncertainty to adjust their learning rates, with more uncertain weights having higher learning rates. We also make a second, independent, hypothesis: synapses communicate their uncertainty by linking it to variability in postsynaptic potential size, with more uncertainty leading to more variability. These two hypotheses cast synaptic plasticity as a problem of Bayesian inference, and thus provide a normative view of learning. They generalize known learning rules, offer an explanation for the large variability in the size of postsynaptic potentials and make falsifiable experimental predictions.