Grid codes vs. multi-scale, multi-field place codes for space

Introduction: Recent work on bats flying over long distances has revealed that single hippocampal cells have multiple place fields of different sizes. At the network level, a multi-scale, multi-field place cell code outperforms classical single-scale, single-field place codes, yet the performance boundaries of such a code remain an open question. In particular, it is unknown how general multi-field codes compare to a highly regular grid code, in which cells form distinct modules with different scales. Methods: In this work, we address the coding properties of theoretical spatial coding models with rigorous analyses of comprehensive simulations. Starting from a multi-scale, multi-field network, we performed evolutionary optimization. The resulting multi-field networks sometimes retained the multi-scale property at the single-cell level but most often converged to a single scale, with all place fields in a given cell having the same size. We compared the results against a single-scale single-field code and a one-dimensional grid code, focusing on two main characteristics: the performance of the code itself and the dynamics of the network generating it. Results: Our simulation experiments revealed that, under normal conditions, a regular grid code outperforms all other codes with respect to decoding accuracy, achieving a given precision with fewer neurons and fields. In contrast, multi-field codes are more robust against noise and lesions, such as random drop-out of neurons, given that the significantly higher number of fields provides redundancy. Contrary to our expectations, the network dynamics of all models, from the original multi-scale models before optimization to the multi-field models that resulted from optimization, did not maintain activity bumps at their original locations when a position-specific external input was removed. Discussion: Optimized multi-field codes appear to strike a compromise between a place code and a grid code that reflects a trade-off between accurate positional encoding and robustness. Surprisingly, the recurrent neural network models we implemented and optimized for either multi- or single-scale, multi-field codes did not intrinsically produce a persistent “memory” of attractor states. These models, therefore, were not continuous attractor networks.