Trends in Cognitive Sciences
OpinionA dual-networks architecture of top-down control
Introduction
The brain learns and adapts to environmental change, while showing resilience to local perturbation and damage. Complex adaptive systems seem to follow common organizational principles across many levels of scale, from subcellular components to social systems that resolve the tension between adaptability and resilience 1, 2, 3, 4. Here, we focus on two of these principles that illuminate the organization of the brain at the systems level: (i) The importance of multiple controlling variables, and (ii) the small-world architecture of efficient information-processing networks.
Complex biological and social systems are often driven by several separate control mechanisms with distinct functional properties [1]. Because the number of controlling variables is usually at least two, but fewer than ten, this principle has been named the ‘rule of hand’ [1]. The different controlling variables often affect the overall state of the system through distinct mechanisms that operate on separable temporal scales 5, 6. Systems with distinct rapid-acting and more slowly changing controlling variables can simultaneously be highly stable, yet flexible. For example, the ecological state of a forest can be rapidly affected by changes in the number of leaf-eating insects and more slowly by changes in the growth of large tree species. The presence of multiple control mechanisms also increases the resilience of a system to perturbation. For example, our sense of balance is supported in parallel by the vestibular system, the visual system and peripheral joint-position sensors. If any one of these three control variables is impaired, some level of balance is still maintained by the remaining mechanisms.
Information flow through complex networks of nodes can be made efficient by structuring the flow between the nodes in certain ways. Networks consisting of multiple densely connected clusters with small numbers of connections between clusters (i.e. small-world networks) are more efficient at information transmission (Figure 1) than are either randomly connected or highly regular lattice networks 2, 3, 7. Such ‘small-world’ networks are ubiquitous. For example, the anatomical connections of the macaque visual system and the neuronal connections of Caenorhabditis elegans have both been described as small-world networks [2].
Here, we propose that the human brain implements top-down control in ways consistent with the complex systems principles of using multiple controllers and small-world-like architecture. We have chosen the study of top-down control as our example 8, 9 because it is a complex function, probably supported by sets of interrelated brain regions that configure downstream processing in accordance with conscious goals 10, 11.
Earlier studies 12, 13 most commonly ascribed top-down control to several prefrontal regions, mainly the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC) and dorsal anterior cingulate cortex/medial superior frontal cortex (dACC/msFC). By contrast, we argue that top-down control is not implemented by such a limited number of regions but rather by a larger collection of functionally related regions. Second, based on both functional studies and recently developed ‘functional connectivity’ methods 3, 4, 11, 14, 15, 16, 17 (Box 1), we make the case that these regions are organized into relatively separate networks. Further, we present evidence that these separate control networks function at different timescales, making different contributions to the adaptability and stability of top-down control, respectively. Lastly, we argue that the network structure of these regions develops and embodies efficient small-world information processing.
Section snippets
Control implemented by a large set of distributed brain regions
Many single-unit and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies, showing that the dlPFC can maintain task-relevant information during the delay between a cue and a subsequent trial, have triggered intense focus on the lateral prefrontal cortex as a top-down controller 12, 18. However, a series of recent event-related, and mixed blocked/event-related human fMRI studies have shown that a large collection of lateral and medial frontal, prefrontal and parietal brain regions also have
Control regions separate into fronto-parietal and cingulo-opercular networks
Cataloging functional differences between brain regions alone provides limited insight into how these regions relate to one another in information processing terms. Hence, recent studies have used resting state functional connectivity MRI (rs-fcMRI) to examine functional relationships between sets of regions [16]. Two recent studies employing rs-fcMRI, one using graph theory and hierarchical clustering [8] and the other using independent component analysis (ICA) [37], have shown that the
Distinct functions of control networks: adaptive control and set-maintenance
Mixed blocked/event-related fMRI designs can separate brain signals based on differences in their temporal profiles 14, 38. In our mixed blocked/event-related fMRI analyses [11], the fronto-parietal network contains signals that potentially initiate and adjust control on a trial-to-trial basis, whereas the cingulo-opercular network provides stable ‘set-maintenance’ over the entire task epoch.
Regions in the fronto-parietal control network respond to cues signifying task onset. In addition, they
Dual-networks model of top-down control
The combination of studies outlined earlier 8, 11, 37, 45 suggests that human behavior draws on two different types of top-down control (Figure 3). The fronto-parietal and cingulo-opercular systems both seem to maintain task-relevant information, but for different purposes and using different mechanisms 11, 18, 23, 25, 32, 33, 46, 47, 48, 49. Hence, we argue that more adaptive control (fronto-parietal) and stable set-maintenance (cingulo-opercular) rely on distinct types of ‘sustained’ activity.
Small-world control network architecture supports efficient information processing
Watts and Strogatz [2] highlighted that the connectional topology of many complex systems is neither completely regular (lattice) nor completely random. In a lattice, a given node or brain region is only locally connected to the next n nodes. Local connectivity is high and nodes are well clustered, but any signal traveling far across the network is significantly slowed because it has to cross too many nodes. One can think of a regular network as a system with only a local bus line that makes
Conclusions and future directions
Evidence suggests that the principles of (i) multiple controlling variables and (ii) small-world connectivity hold true for the human brain, in particular for higher cognitive functions, such as top-down control.
In contradistinction to prior models, we argue that top-down control is driven by a fairly large collection of brain regions. These regions are distributed throughout the prefrontal, frontal and parietal cortex, in addition to the insula, cerebellum and thalamus.
Although previous models
Acknowledgements
We thank Francis M. Miezin and Steven M. Nelson for their suggestions and help with data analysis. We thank Marcus E. Raichle, Ronny A.T. Dosenbach, Jessica A. Church, Alecia C. Vogel and Yannic B.L. Dosenbach for helpful discussions. This work was supported by NIH grants NS41255 and NS46424 (S.E.P.), the John Merck Scholars Fund, the Burroughs-Wellcome Fund, the Dana Foundation (B.L.S.), the Ogle Family Fund (B.L.S.), a Washington University Chancellor's Graduate Fellowship (to D.A.F.) and a
References (65)
Organization, development and function of complex brain networks
Trends Cogn. Sci.
(2004)A core system for the implementation of task sets
Neuron
(2006)Mixed blocked/event-related designs separate transient and sustained activity in fMRI
Neuroimage
(2003)A method for using blocked and event-related fMRI data to study ‘resting state’ functional connectivity
Neuroimage
(2007)The activation of attentional networks
Neuroimage
(2005)- et al.
The cognitive control network: integrated cortical regions with dissociable functions
Neuroimage
(2007) Neural mechanisms of transient and sustained cognitive control during task switching
Neuron
(2003)Top-down control-signal dynamics in anterior cingulate and prefrontal cortex neurons following task switching
Neuron
(2007)Resolving emotional conflict: a role for the rostral anterior cingulate cortex in modulating activity in the amygdala
Neuron
(2006)Anterior cingulate and posterior parietal cortices are sensitive to dissociable forms of conflict in a task-switching paradigm
Neuron
(2006)