Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 429

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Contrast-Invariant Orientation Tuning in Cat Visual Cortex: Thalamocortical Input Tuning and Correlation-Based Intracortical Connectivity

Open access
Troyer, Todd W., Krukowski, Anton E., Priebe, Nicholas J., Miller, Kenneth D.·1998·The Journal of Neuroscience
DOI 10.1523/jneurosci.18-15-05908.1998
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The origin of orientation selectivity in visual cortical responses is a central problem for understanding cerebral cortical circuitry. In cats, many experiments suggest that orientation selectivity arises from the arrangement of lateral geniculate nucleus (LGN) afferents to layer 4 simple cells. However, this explanation is not sufficient to account for the contrast invariance of orientation tuning. To understand contrast invariance, we first characterize the input to cat simple cells generated by the oriented arrangement of LGN afferents. We demonstrate that it has two components: a spatial-phase-specific component (i.e., one that depends on receptive field spatial phase), which is tuned for orientation, and a phase-nonspecific component, which is untuned. Both components grow with contrast. Second, we show that a correlation-based intracortical circuit, in which connectivity between cell pairs is determined by the correlation of their LGN inputs, is sufficient to achieve well tuned, contrast-invariant orientation tuning. This circuit generates both spatially opponent, “antiphase” inhibition (“push–pull”), and spatially matched, “same-phase” excitation. The inhibition, if sufficiently strong, suppresses the untuned input component and sharpens responses to the tuned component at all contrasts. The excitation amplifies tuned responses. This circuit agrees with experimental evidence showing spatial opponency between, and similar orientation tuning of, the excitatory and inhibitory inputs received by a simple cell. Orientation tuning is primarily input driven, accounting for the observed invariance of tuning width after removal of intracortical synaptic input, as well as for the dependence of orientation tuning on stimulus spatial frequency. The model differs from previous push–pull models in requiring dominant rather than balanced inhibition and in predicting that a population of layer 4 inhibitory neurons should respond in a contrast-dependent manner to stimuli of all orientations, although their tuning width may be similar to that of excitatory neurons. The model demonstrates that fundamental response properties of cortical layer 4 can be explained by circuitry expected to develop under correlation-based rules of synaptic plasticity, and shows how such circuitry allows the cortex to distinguish stimulus intensity from stimulus form.

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 · 10.1523/jneurosci.18-15-05908.1998

Cites

10 of 10 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 10 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Troyer, T. W., Krukowski, A. E., Priebe, N. J., & Miller, K. D.
Venue
The Journal of Neuroscience
Publisher
Society for Neuroscience
Published
1998-08-01
Volume
18
Issue
15
Pages
5908-5927
ISSN
  • 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-2401
DOI
10.1523/jneurosci.18-15-05908.1998
OpenAlex
W2137413309
Cited by
429
References
10
FWCI
7.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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.