The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Quantitative analysis of retinal ganglion cell classifications.
Open accessAbstract
The classification of cat retinal ganglion cells as X or Y on the basis of linearity or nonlinearity of spatial summation has been confirmed and extended. Recordings were taken from optic tract fibres of anaesthetized, paralysed cats. 2. When an alternating phase sine wave grating was used as a stimulus, X cells had null positions and Y cells responded at all positions of the grating. 3. These results did not depend on the temporal wave form or the temporal frequency of pattern alternation over a wide range. 4. At high spatial frequencies for the particular cell, a Y cell gave abig 'on‐off' response, or frequency doubling, at all positions of the grating, while an X cell did not. 5. The use of contrast sensitivity versus spatial phase also served to differentiate the two cell types. With an alternating sine grating stimulus X cells had a sinusoidal dependence on spatial phase, while each Y cell's sensitivity depended in a complicated manner on spatial phase. 6. Sensitivity versus spatial phase for different Fourier components of the neural response also separated the two classes of cells. Significant second harmonic distortion was present in Y cells. The second harmonic component was spatial phase insensitive, and became dominant at high spatial frequencies. 7. The maximum of the 2nd/1st harmonic ratio was taken as an index of nonlinearity. X cells always had a nonlinearity index less than 1 while in Y cells this index always exceeded 1. 8. Response to spots, diffuse light and drifting gratings were compared to the nonlinearity index as a basis for classifying cells. The nonlinearity index was most reliable because it was least dependent on retinal eccentricity.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The contrast sensitivity of retinal ganglion cells of the cat
Enroth-Cugell, C., & Robson, J. G. (1966) · The Journal of Physiology · doi:10.1113/jphysiol.1966.sp008107 · Cited by 2,625
Cited by
Spatial frequency selectivity of cells in macaque visual cortex
De Valois, R. L., Albrecht, D. G., & Thorell, L. G. (1982) · Vision Research · doi:10.1016/0042-6989(82)90113-4 · Cited by 1,489
Spatial summation in the receptive fields of simple cells in the cat's striate cortex.
Movshon, J. A., Thompson, I. D., & Tolhurst, D. J. (1978) · The Journal of Physiology · doi:10.1113/jphysiol.1978.sp012488 · Cited by 890
Parallel visual pathways: A review
Lennie, P. (1980) · Vision Research · doi:10.1016/0042-6989(80)90115-7 · Cited by 509
Sustained and transient mechanisms in human vision: Temporal and spatial properties
Legge, G. E. (1978) · Vision Research · doi:10.1016/0042-6989(78)90079-2 · Cited by 445
Motion selectivity and the contrast-response function of simple cells in the visual cortex
Albrecht, D. G., & Geisler, W. S. (1991) · Visual Neuroscience · doi:10.1017/s0952523800010336 · Cited by 433
Metadata
- Authors
- Hochstein, S., & Shapley, R. M.
- Venue
- The Journal of Physiology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1976-11
- Volume
- 262
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 237-264
- ISSN
- 0022-3751 (ISSN-L)
- 1469-7793
- OpenAlex
- W1969780391
- Cited by
- 477
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 13.39
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.