CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 157Visual perception and processing mechanismsNeural dynamics and brain functionstochastic dynamics and bifurcation

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 28 of the 28 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

How Noise Contributes to Contrast Invariance of Orientation Tuning in Cat Visual Cortex

Open access
Hansel, D., van Vreeswijk, C.·2002·The Journal of Neuroscience
DOI 10.1523/jneurosci.22-12-05118.2002PMC PMC6757721
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The width of the orientation tuning curves of the spike response of neurons in V1 is invariant to contrast. This property constrains the possible mechanisms underlying orientation selectivity. It has been suggested that noise circumvents the iceberg effect that would prevent contrast invariance in the purely feedforward mechanism. Here we investigate systematically how noise contributes to the contrast invariance of orientation tuning curves in V1. We study three models of increasing complexity: a simple threshold-linear firing rate model, a leaky integrate-and-fire model, and a conductance-based model. We show that the noise transmutes the threshold nonlinearity of the input-output relationships into an approximate power law without a threshold within some firing rate range. This implies that, under certain conditions which are derived here, the tuning of the neuron output is approximately contrast invariant. In particular we show that this mechanism for contrast invariance requires that the neuron firing rate must not be too large and that increasing or lowering the contrast too much destroys this invariance. We also show that if this mechanism operates in V1, the spike response, R, and average voltage response V of the neurons in V1 should vary with the contrast, C, according to R(C)gamma proportional to V(C)gamma. The exponent gamma can be estimated from the amount by which the spike tuning curve is sharpened with respect to the voltage tuning curves of the neurons. This prediction does not depend on the specifics of the model and can be tested experimentally.

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.22-12-05118.2002

Cites

28 of 28 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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

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

This paper’s reference list could not be split into single entries.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 157

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Hansel, D., & van Vreeswijk, C.
Affiliations
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
ORCID
Hansel, D.
Venue
The Journal of Neuroscience
Publisher
Society for Neuroscience
Published
2002-06-15
Volume
22
Issue
12
Pages
5118-5128
ISSN
  • 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-2401
DOI
10.1523/jneurosci.22-12-05118.2002
PMC
PMC6757721
OpenAlex
W2170697082
Cited by
157
References
28
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 10
FWCI
3.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (9907949)
  • Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Statistical and Nonlinear Physics › stochastic dynamics and bifurcation
Keywords
contrast invariance, orientation tuning, primary visual cortex, neural noise, orientation selectivity, leaky integrate-and-fire model, conductance-based models, threshold nonlinearity, power-law response, spike responses, voltage response, cat visual cortex
MeSH terms
Animals, Cats, Electric Conductivity, Kinetics, Membrane Potentials, Models, Neurological, Models, Theoretical, Synaptic Transmission, Neurons, Visual Cortex

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