I have developed "tennis elbow" from lugging this book around the past four weeks, but it is worth the pain, the effort, and the aspirin. It is also worth the (relatively speaking) bargain price. Including appendixes, this book contains 894 pages of text. The entire panorama of the neural sciences is surveyed and examined, and it is comprehensive in its scope, from genomes to social behaviors. The editors explicitly state that the book is designed as "an introductory text for students of biology, behavior, and medicine," but it is hard to imagine any audience, interested in any fragment of neuroscience at any level of sophistication, that would not enjoy this book. The editors have done a masterful job of weaving together the biologic, the behavioral, and the clinical sciences into a single tapestry in which everyone from the molecular biologist to the practicing psychiatrist can find and appreciate his or

Principles of Neural Science

Topological data analysis (TDA) can broadly be described as a collection of data analysis methods that find structure in data. These methods include clustering, manifold estimation, nonlinear dimension reduction, mode estimation, ridge estimation and persistent homology. This paper reviews some of these methods.

Topological Data Analysis

In this article we construct a new family of linear maximum rank distance (MRD) codes for all parameters. This family contains the only known family for general parameters, the Gabidulin codes, and contains codes inequivalent to the Gabidulin codes. This family also contains the well-known family of semifields known as Generalised Twisted Fields. We also calculate the automorphism group of these codes, including the automorphism group of the Gabidulin codes.

A new family of linear maximum rank distance codes

Low-density parity-check (LDPC) convolutional codes are capable of achieving excellent performance with low encoding and decoding complexity. In this paper, we discuss several graph-cover-based methods for deriving families of time-invariant and time-varying LDPC convolutional codes from LDPC block codes and show how earlier proposed LDPC convolutional code constructions can be presented within this framework. Some of the constructed convolutional codes significantly outperform the underlying LDPC block codes. We investigate some possible reasons for this “convolutional gain,” and we also discuss the-mostly moderate-decoder cost increase that is incurred by going from LDPC block to LDPC convolutional codes.

Deriving Good LDPC Convolutional Codes from LDPC Block Codes

Generalized Twisted Gabidulin Codes

For a growing number of applications, such as cellular, peer-to-peer, and sensor networks, efficient error-free transmission of data through a network is essential. Toward this end, Kotter and Kschischang propose the use of subspace codes to provide error correction in the network coding context. The primary construction for subspace codes is the lifting of rank-metric or matrix codes, a process that preserves the structural and distance properties of the underlying code. Thus, to characterize the structure and error-correcting capability of these subspace codes, it is valuable to perform such a characterization of the underlying rank-metric and matrix codes. This paper lays a foundation for this analysis through a framework for classifying rank-metric and matrix codes based on their structure and distance properties. To enable this classification, we extend work by Berger on equivalence for rank-metric codes to define a notion of equivalence for matrix codes, and we characterize the group structure of the collection of maps that preserve such equivalence. We then compare the notions of equivalence for these two related types of codes and show that matrix equivalence is strictly more general than rank-metric equivalence. Finally, we characterize the set of equivalence maps that fix the prominent class of rank-metric codes known as Gabidulin codes. In particular, we give a complete characterization of the rank-metric automorphism group of Gabidulin codes, correcting work by Berger, and give a partial characterization of the matrix-automorphism group of the expanded matrix codes that arise from Gabidulin codes.

Equivalence for Rank-Metric and Matrix Codes and Automorphism Groups of Gabidulin Codes

Neural codes allow the brain to represent, process, and store information about the world. Combinatorial codes, comprised of binary patterns of neural activity, encode information via the collective behavior of populations of neurons. A code is called convex if its codewords correspond to regions defined by an arrangement of convex open sets in Euclidean space. Convex codes have been observed experimentally in many brain areas, including sensory cortices and the hippocampus, where neurons exhibit convex receptive fields. What makes a neural code convex? That is, how can we tell from the intrinsic structure of a code if there exists a corresponding arrangement of convex open sets? In this work, we provide a complete characterization of local obstructions to convexity. This motivates us to define max intersection-complete codes, a family guaranteed to have no local obstructions. We then show how our characterization enables one to use free resolutions of Stanley--Reisner ideals in order to detect violations...

https://epubs.siam.org/doi/pdf/10.1137/16M1073170

What Makes a Neural Code Convex

Cyclic orbit codes are constant dimension subspace codes that arise as the orbit of a
cyclic subgroup of the general linear group acting on subspaces in the given ambient space.
With the aid of the largest subfield over which the given subspace is a vector space, the cardinality
of the orbit code can be determined, and estimates for its distance can be found.
This subfield is closely related to the stabilizer of the generating subspace.
Finally, with a linkage construction larger, and longer, constant dimension codes can be derived from cyclic
orbit codes without compromising the distance.

Cyclic Orbit Codes and Stabilizer Subfields

Neural codes allow the brain to represent, process, and store information about the world. Combinatorial codes, comprised of binary patterns of neural activity, encode information via the collective behavior of populations of neurons. A code is called convex if its codewords correspond to regions defined by an arrangement of convex open sets in Euclidean space. Convex codes have been observed experimentally in many brain areas, including sensory cortices and the hippocampus, where neurons exhibit convex receptive fields. What makes a neural code convex? That is, how can we tell from the intrinsic structure of a code if there exists a corresponding arrangement of convex open sets? In this work, we provide a complete characterization of local obstructions to convexity. This motivates us to define max intersection-complete codes, a family guaranteed to have no local obstructions. We then show how our characterization enables one to use free resolutions of Stanley-Reisner ideals in order to detect violations of convexity. Taken together, these results provide a significant advance in understanding the intrinsic combinatorial properties of convex codes.

What makes a neural code convex

Shannon's seminal 1948 work gave rise to two distinct areas of research: information theory and mathematical coding theory. While information theory has had a strong influence on theoretical neuroscience, ideas from mathematical coding theory have received considerably less attention. Here we take a new look at combinatorial neural codes from a mathematical coding theory perspective, examining the error correction capabilities of familiar receptive field codes RF codes. We find, perhaps surprisingly, that the high levels of redundancy present in these codes do not support accurate error correction, although the error-correcting performance of receptive field codes catches up to that of random comparison codes when a small tolerance to error is introduced. However, receptive field codes are good at reflecting distances between represented stimuli, while the random comparison codes are not. We suggest that a compromise in error-correcting capability may be a necessary price to pay for a neural code whose structure serves not only error correction, but must also reflect relationships between stimuli.

/pdf/combinatorial-neural-codes-from-a-mathematical-coding-theory-2mxdhixs7u.pdf

Katherine Morrison

Papers

Equivalence for Rank-Metric and Matrix Codes and Automorphism Groups of Gabidulin Codes

What Makes a Neural Code Convex

Cyclic Orbit Codes and Stabilizer Subfields

What makes a neural code convex

Combinatorial neural codes from a mathematical coding theory perspective