↓ Skip to main content

Traveling pulses in a stochastic neural field model of direction selectivity

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience, January 2012
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
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
29 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
Traveling pulses in a stochastic neural field model of direction selectivity
Published in
Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience, January 2012
DOI 10.3389/fncom.2012.00090
Pubmed ID
Authors

Paul C. Bressloff, Jeremy Wilkerson

Abstract

We analyze the effects of extrinsic noise on traveling pulses in a neural field model of direction selectivity. The model consists of a one-dimensional scalar neural field with an asymmetric weight distribution consisting of an offset Mexican hat function. We first show how, in the absence of any noise, the system supports spontaneously propagating traveling pulses that can lock to externally moving stimuli. Using a separation of time-scales and perturbation methods previously developed for stochastic reaction-diffusion equations, we then show how extrinsic noise in the activity variables leads to a diffusive-like displacement (wandering) of the wave from its uniformly translating position at long time-scales, and fluctuations in the wave profile around its instantaneous position at short time-scales. In the case of freely propagating pulses, the wandering is characterized by pure Brownian motion, whereas in the case of stimulus-locked pulses, it is given by an Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process. This establishes that stimulus-locked pulses are more robust to noise.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 7%
Germany 1 3%
France 1 3%
Netherlands 1 3%
Belarus 1 3%
United Kingdom 1 3%
Unknown 22 76%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 34%
Researcher 10 34%
Professor 2 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Physics and Astronomy 6 21%
Mathematics 5 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 10%
Neuroscience 3 10%
Psychology 3 10%
Other 4 14%
Unknown 5 17%
Attention Score in Context

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 30 October 2012.
All research outputs
#15,019,306
of 23,301,510 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
#754
of 1,370 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#160,721
of 246,559 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
#34
of 70 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,301,510 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,370 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 246,559 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 70 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.