Linear filtering and nonlinear interactions in direction-selective visual cortex neurons: A noise correlation analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Spatial and temporal properties related to direction selectivity of both simple and complex type visual cortex neurons were assessed by cross-correlation analysis of their responses to random ternary white noise. This stimulus consisted of multiple randomly placed bars, each colored white, black, or gray with equal probability, which were rerandomized every 5-10 ms. A first-order cross-correlation analysis of a neuron's spike train with the spatiotemporal history of the stimulus provided an estimate of the neuron's linear spatiotemporal filtering properties. A nonlinear correlation analysis measured the amount of interaction for pair-wise combinations of bars as a function of their relative spatial and temporal separations. The spatiotemporal orientation of each of these functions was quantified using a "motion energy index" (MEI), which was compared to the neurons' direction selectivity measured with drifting sinewave gratings. Both first-order and nonlinear correlation plots usually showed s-t orientation whose sign was consistent with the neuron's direction preference; however, in many cases the MEI for first-order analysis was weak compared to that seen in the nonlinear interactions. The structures of the nonlinear interaction functions were also compared with predictions from a conventional model of direction selectivity based on a simple spatiotemporally oriented linear filter, followed by an intensive nonlinearity ("LN model"). These comparisons showed that some neurons' data agreed reasonably well with such a model, while others agreed poorly or not at all. Simulations of an alternative model which combines signals from idealized lagged and nonlagged front-end linear filters produce noise correlation results more like those seen in the neurophysiological data.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".