↓ Skip to main content

Are V1 Simple Cells Optimized for Visual Occlusions? A Comparative Study

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
42 Mendeley
citeulike
1 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
Are V1 Simple Cells Optimized for Visual Occlusions? A Comparative Study
Published in
PLoS Computational Biology, June 2013
DOI 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003062
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jörg Bornschein, Marc Henniges, Jörg Lücke

Abstract

Simple cells in primary visual cortex were famously found to respond to low-level image components such as edges. Sparse coding and independent component analysis (ICA) emerged as the standard computational models for simple cell coding because they linked their receptive fields to the statistics of visual stimuli. However, a salient feature of image statistics, occlusions of image components, is not considered by these models. Here we ask if occlusions have an effect on the predicted shapes of simple cell receptive fields. We use a comparative approach to answer this question and investigate two models for simple cells: a standard linear model and an occlusive model. For both models we simultaneously estimate optimal receptive fields, sparsity and stimulus noise. The two models are identical except for their component superposition assumption. We find the image encoding and receptive fields predicted by the models to differ significantly. While both models predict many Gabor-like fields, the occlusive model predicts a much sparser encoding and high percentages of 'globular' receptive fields. This relatively new center-surround type of simple cell response is observed since reverse correlation is used in experimental studies. While high percentages of 'globular' fields can be obtained using specific choices of sparsity and overcompleteness in linear sparse coding, no or only low proportions are reported in the vast majority of studies on linear models (including all ICA models). Likewise, for the here investigated linear model and optimal sparsity, only low proportions of 'globular' fields are observed. In comparison, the occlusive model robustly infers high proportions and can match the experimentally observed high proportions of 'globular' fields well. Our computational study, therefore, suggests that 'globular' fields may be evidence for an optimal encoding of visual occlusions in primary visual cortex.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Germany 1 2%
Canada 1 2%
Belarus 1 2%
Unknown 38 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 19%
Student > Bachelor 4 10%
Student > Master 4 10%
Other 3 7%
Other 6 14%
Unknown 7 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 10 24%
Computer Science 8 19%
Engineering 7 17%
Physics and Astronomy 4 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 7%
Other 7 17%
Unknown 3 7%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 18 February 2014.
All research outputs
#3,229,486
of 25,913,612 outputs
Outputs from PLoS Computational Biology
#2,824
of 9,071 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#26,578
of 211,543 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS Computational Biology
#26
of 106 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,913,612 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,071 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its peers.
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 211,543 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 106 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.