↓ Skip to main content

Perceptual Decision Making “Through the Eyes” of a Large-Scale Neural Model of V1

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 Mendeley
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
Perceptual Decision Making “Through the Eyes” of a Large-Scale Neural Model of V1
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00161
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jianing V. Shi, Jim Wielaard, R. Theodore Smith, Paul Sajda

Abstract

Sparse coding has been posited as an efficient information processing strategy employed by sensory systems, particularly visual cortex. Substantial theoretical and experimental work has focused on the issue of sparse encoding, namely how the early visual system maps the scene into a sparse representation. In this paper we investigate the complementary issue of sparse decoding, for example given activity generated by a realistic mapping of the visual scene to neuronal spike trains, how do downstream neurons best utilize this representation to generate a "decision." Specifically we consider both sparse (L1-regularized) and non-sparse (L2 regularized) linear decoding for mapping the neural dynamics of a large-scale spiking neuron model of primary visual cortex (V1) to a two alternative forced choice (2-AFC) perceptual decision. We show that while both sparse and non-sparse linear decoding yield discrimination results quantitatively consistent with human psychophysics, sparse linear decoding is more efficient in terms of the number of selected informative dimension.

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.
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 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 6%
Germany 1 3%
Unknown 29 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 25%
Student > Master 7 22%
Researcher 5 16%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 9%
Student > Bachelor 2 6%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 3 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 22%
Psychology 5 16%
Engineering 5 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 13%
Neuroscience 3 9%
Other 5 16%
Unknown 3 9%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 19 April 2013.
All research outputs
#20,190,878
of 22,707,247 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#23,834
of 29,482 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#248,737
of 280,717 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#851
of 969 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,707,247 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,482 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 280,717 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 969 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.