|
|
||||||||
The Journal of Neurophysiology Vol. 87 No. 5 May 2002, pp. 2542-2554
Copyright ©2002 by the American Physiological Society
Department of Neurobiology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut 06520-8001
Hung, Chou P.,
Benjamin M. Ramsden, and
Anna Wang Roe.
Weakly Modulated Spike Trains: Significance, Precision, and
Correction for Sample Size. J. Neurophysiol. 87: 2542-2554, 2002. Many single-unit
electrophysiological studies of visual cortex have investigated strong
evoked responses to simple stimuli such as oriented gratings.
Experiments involving other types of stimuli, such as natural scenes,
higher-order features, and surface brightness, produce single-unit
responses that are more difficult to interpret. Experiments with
brightness, in particular, evoke single-unit responses that are
typically weakly modulated. When the brightness is generated by a
visual illusion such as the Cornsweet illusion, statistical tests are
often necessary to distinguish true responses from baseline
fluctuations. Here, using data collected from cat Areas 17 and 18 in
response to real and illusory brightness stimuli, we provide a method
for detecting and quantifying weak but significant periodic responses.
By randomizing spike trains (via bootstrap methods), we provide
confidence levels for response significance, permitting the evaluation
of both weak and strong responses. We show that because of a strong
dependence on total spike number, response significance can only be
appropriately determined with randomized spike trains of similar spike
number. Such randomizations can be performed for both stimulus-elicited and spontaneously occurring spike trains. By developing a method for
generating randomized modulated spike trains (phase-restricted randomization) from actual recordings, we calculate upper and lower
confidence limits of modulated spike trains and describe how
measurement precision varies as a function of total spike count.
Finally, using this randomization method, we describe how a correction
function can be determined to correct for measurement bias introduced
at low spike counts. These methods may also be useful in the study of
small but potentially significant responses in other systems.
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
B. Gourevitch and J. J. Eggermont Evaluating Information Transfer Between Auditory Cortical Neurons J Neurophysiol, March 1, 2007; 97(3): 2533 - 2543. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. Vladusich, M. P. Lucassen, and F. W. Cornelissen Do Cortical Neurons Process Luminance or Contrast to Encode Surface Properties? J Neurophysiol, April 1, 2006; 95(4): 2638 - 2649. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. W. Roe, H. D. Lu, and C. P. Hung Cortical processing of a brightness illusion PNAS, March 8, 2005; 102(10): 3869 - 3874. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Z. Del Prete, S. P. Baker, and P. Grigg Stretch Responses of Cutaneous RA Afferent Neurons in Mouse Hairy Skin J Neurophysiol, March 1, 2003; 89(3): 1649 - 1659. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| Visit Other APS Journals Online |