↓ Skip to main content

Sparse Coding Can Predict Primary Visual Cortex Receptive Field Changes Induced by Abnormal Visual Input

Overview of attention for article published in PLoS Computational Biology, May 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
115 Mendeley
citeulike
3 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Sparse Coding Can Predict Primary Visual Cortex Receptive Field Changes Induced by Abnormal Visual Input
Published in
PLoS Computational Biology, May 2013
DOI 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003005
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jonathan J. Hunt, Peter Dayan, Geoffrey J. Goodhill

Abstract

Receptive fields acquired through unsupervised learning of sparse representations of natural scenes have similar properties to primary visual cortex (V1) simple cell receptive fields. However, what drives in vivo development of receptive fields remains controversial. The strongest evidence for the importance of sensory experience in visual development comes from receptive field changes in animals reared with abnormal visual input. However, most sparse coding accounts have considered only normal visual input and the development of monocular receptive fields. Here, we applied three sparse coding models to binocular receptive field development across six abnormal rearing conditions. In every condition, the changes in receptive field properties previously observed experimentally were matched to a similar and highly faithful degree by all the models, suggesting that early sensory development can indeed be understood in terms of an impetus towards sparsity. As previously predicted in the literature, we found that asymmetries in inter-ocular correlation across orientations lead to orientation-specific binocular receptive fields. Finally we used our models to design a novel stimulus that, if present during rearing, is predicted by the sparsity principle to lead robustly to radically abnormal receptive fields.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 115 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 3 3%
France 3 3%
United States 2 2%
Australia 1 <1%
Belarus 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Greece 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Unknown 102 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 33 29%
Researcher 27 23%
Student > Master 16 14%
Student > Bachelor 7 6%
Student > Postgraduate 5 4%
Other 17 15%
Unknown 10 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 22 19%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 22 19%
Computer Science 16 14%
Psychology 10 9%
Engineering 10 9%
Other 23 20%
Unknown 12 10%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 August 2022.
All research outputs
#14,403,185
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from PLoS Computational Biology
#5,978
of 8,964 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#106,426
of 205,496 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS Computational Biology
#71
of 114 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,964 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.4. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 205,496 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 114 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.