Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,151

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Accuracy of Tetrode Spike Separation as Determined by Simultaneous Intracellular and Extracellular Measurements

Harris, Kenneth D., Henze, Darrell A., Csicsvari, Jozsef, Hirase, Hajime, Buzsáki, György·2000·Journal of Neurophysiology

Abstract

Simultaneous recording from large numbers of neurons is a prerequisite for understanding their cooperative behavior. Various recording techniques and spike separation methods are being used toward this goal. However, the error rates involved in spike separation have not yet been quantified. We studied the separation reliability of "tetrode" (4-wire electrode)-recorded spikes by monitoring simultaneously from the same cell intracellularly with a glass pipette and extracellularly with a tetrode. With manual spike sorting, we found a trade-off between Type I and Type II errors, with errors typically ranging from 0 to 30% depending on the amplitude and firing pattern of the cell, the similarity of the waveshapes of neighboring neurons, and the experience of the operator. Performance using only a single wire was markedly lower, indicating the advantages of multiple-site monitoring techniques over single-wire recordings. For tetrode recordings, error rates were increased by burst activity and during periods of cellular synchrony. The lowest possible separation error rates were estimated by a search for the best ellipsoidal cluster shape. Human operator performance was significantly below the estimated optimum. Investigation of error distributions indicated that suboptimal performance was caused by inability of the operators to mark cluster boundaries accurately in a high-dimensional feature space. We therefore hypothesized that automatic spike-sorting algorithms have the potential to significantly lower error rates. Implementation of a semi-automatic classification system confirms this suggestion, reducing errors close to the estimated optimum, in the range 0-8%.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1152/jn.2000.84.1.401

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 5 references

Cited by

See all 1,151

Metadata

Authors
Harris, K. D., Henze, D. A., Csicsvari, J., Hirase, H., & Buzsáki, G.
Venue
Journal of Neurophysiology
Published
2000-07
Volume
84
Issue
1
Pages
401-414
ISSN
  • 0022-3077 (ISSN-L)
  • 1522-1598
OpenAlex
W2114747787
Cited by
1,151
References
5
FWCI
4.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Accuracy of Tetrode Spike Separation as Determined by Simultaneous Intracellular and Extracellular Measurements. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1152/jn.2000.84.1.401
The paper
Harris, K. D., Henze, D. A., Csicsvari, J., Hirase, H., & Buzsáki, G. (2000). Accuracy of Tetrode Spike Separation as Determined by Simultaneous Intracellular and Extracellular Measurements. Journal of Neurophysiology. https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.2000.84.1.401

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.