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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
PRANAS: A New Platform for Retinal Analysis and Simulation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Neuroinformatics, September 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fninf.2017.00049 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Bruno Cessac, Pierre Kornprobst, Selim Kraria, Hassan Nasser, Daniela Pamplona, Geoffrey Portelli, Thierry Viéville |
| Abstract |
The retina encodes visual scenes by trains of action potentials that are sent to the brain via the optic nerve. In this paper, we describe a new free access user-end software allowing to better understand this coding. It is called PRANAS (https://pranas.inria.fr), standing for Platform for Retinal ANalysis And Simulation. PRANAS targets neuroscientists and modelers by providing a unique set of retina-related tools. PRANAS integrates a retina simulator allowing large scale simulations while keeping a strong biological plausibility and a toolbox for the analysis of spike train population statistics. The statistical method (entropy maximization under constraints) takes into account both spatial and temporal correlations as constraints, allowing to analyze the effects of memory on statistics. PRANAS also integrates a tool computing and representing in 3D (time-space) receptive fields. All these tools are accessible through a friendly graphical user interface. The most CPU-costly of them have been implemented to run in parallel. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Iraq | 1 | 33% |
| Spain | 1 | 33% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 27 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 33% |
| Researcher | 5 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 15% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Unknown | 4 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Neuroscience | 11 | 41% |
| Computer Science | 5 | 19% |
| Engineering | 4 | 15% |
| Mathematics | 1 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Unknown | 3 | 11% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 06 October 2017.
All research outputs
#16,007,952
of 25,770,491 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroinformatics
#509
of 847 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#179,205
of 325,529 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroinformatics
#9
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,770,491 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 847 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 325,529 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.