Bayesian Bi-clustering of Neural Spiking Activity with Latent Structures
Ganchao Wei

TL;DR
This paper introduces a Bayesian bi-clustering method for neural spiking data that captures spatial and temporal structures through latent trajectories and dynamics, enabling more accurate analysis of large-scale neural recordings.
Contribution
The paper develops a non-parametric Bayesian bi-clustering model with an efficient MCMC algorithm for analyzing neural spiking activity, capturing complex latent structures.
Findings
Successfully recovers true bi-clustering structures in simulations.
Provides more accurate and interpretable results in neural data analysis.
Potential applications beyond neuroscience.
Abstract
Modern neural recording techniques allow neuroscientists to obtain spiking activity of multiple neurons from different brain regions over long time periods, which requires new statistical methods to be developed for understanding structure of the large-scale data. In this paper, we develop a bi-clustering method to cluster the neural spiking activity spatially and temporally, according to their low-dimensional latent structures. The spatial (neuron) clusters are defined by the latent trajectories within each neural population, while the temporal (state) clusters are defined by (populationally) synchronous local linear dynamics shared with different periods. To flexibly extract the bi-clustering structure, we build the model non-parametrically, and develop an efficient Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) algorithm to sample the posterior distributions of model parameters. Validating our…
Peer Reviews
Decision·ICLR 2024 poster
The algorithm is clearly described, reasonable assumptions are imposed, and it has a potentially large range of applications. The overall writing is good and the presentation is clear.
The numerical results, including simulation studies and real data application, are not enough convincing.
1. The problem is well-motivated with a meaningful and important application. 2. The paper is mostly well-written and clearly presented. 3. Sufficient background and preliminaries are provided. 4. Details on the derivation of the MCMC algorithms are provided. 5. The challenging goal of conducting full Bayesian inference for a complex clustering task is of itself great importance.
1. While some constraints required for identifiability are provided at the end of section 2.1, I am not convinced that these are sufficient conditions. A theoretical proof of the model identifiability along with all necessary conditions seems important here, given the vast number of parameters. 2. The MCMC algorithm has incorporated all the most modern efficient MCMC techniques, including the Polya-Gamma augmentation, Miller&Harrison sampler for mixture of finite mixtures, FFBS for state space m
* Different from previous LDS methods, this paper explores multi-region neural data from a new perspective: the authors try to understand multi-neural populations by spatiotemporal clustering structures. * Non-parametrically model the neural data so that there is no need to prespecify the number for subject and state clusters.
* No analysis of the scalability of this method. For both syntactic data and real neural data, the number of neurons is small (e.g., 30, 60). Could this method generalize to a large neural recording? Such as a larger number of neurons and a longer time stamps. * No comparison of the proposed model with other latent variable models like SLDS and rSLDS. * Some typos, e.g., the "cite" doesn't refer to a paper in section 2.3, the figure index should be 2 rather than 3 in section 3, and the figure
Videos
Taxonomy
TopicsNeural dynamics and brain function · Functional Brain Connectivity Studies · Neural Networks and Applications
