Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25449335›Full record

ReviewVision research2015

Cortical magnification plus cortical plasticity equals vision?

Richard T Born, Alexander R Trott, Till S Hartmann

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Vision research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. High-Fidelity Backpropagation through Primate Foveal Cones.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2026
    Article
  2. HIGH-FIDELITY BACKPROPAGATION THROUGH PRIMATE FOVEAL CONES.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Visual Search Asymmetry: Deep Nets and Humans Share Similar Inherent Biases.Advances in neural information processing systems · 2021
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Advanced Circuit and Cellular Imaging Methods in Nonhuman Primates.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2019
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Richard T BornDept. of Neurobiology, Harvard Medical School, United States; Center for Brain Science, Harvard University, United States. Electronic address: rborn@hms.harvard.edu.
Alexander R TrottDept. of Neurobiology, Harvard Medical School, United States; Harvard PhD Program in Neuroscience, United States. Electronic address: atrott@fas.harvard.edu.
Till S HartmannDept. of Neurobiology, Harvard Medical School, United States. Electronic address: till@hms.harvard.edu.

Funding

FUNCTIONAL ORGANIZATION OF VISUAL AREA MTR01EY011379 · NEI · HARVARD UNIVERSITY (MEDICAL SCHOOL) · PI BORN, RICHARD T · 1996 to 2019
$8.0M
FUNDAMENTAL NEUROBIOLOGYT32NS007484 · NINDS · HARVARD UNIVERSITY (MEDICAL SCHOOL) · PI REGEHR, WADE G · 2000 to 2014
$5.9M
RESEARCH TRAINING IN VISUAL NEUROSCIENCET32EY007110 · NEI · HARVARD UNIVERSITY (MEDICAL SCHOOL) · PI BORN, RICHARD T · 1988 to 2023
$4.1M
NEI NIH HHS EY11379NEI NIH HHS R01 EY011379NEI NIH HHS T32 EY007110NINDS NIH HHS T32 NS007484
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Most approaches to visual prostheses have focused on the retina, and for good reasons. The earlier that one introduces signals into the visual system, the more one can take advantage of its prodigious computational abilities. For methods that make use of microelectrodes to introduce electrical signals, however, the limited density and volume occupying nature of the electrodes place severe limits on the image resolution that can be provided to the brain. In this regard, non-retinal areas in general, and the primary visual cortex in particular, possess one large advantage: "magnification factor" (MF)-a value that represents the distance across a sheet of neurons that represents a given angle of the visual field. In the foveal representation of primate primary visual cortex, the MF is enormous-on the order of 15-20 mm/deg in monkeys and humans, whereas on the retina, the MF is limited by the optical design of the eye to around 0.3m m/deg. This means that, for an electrode array of a given density, a much higher-resolution image can be introduced into V1 than onto the retina (or any other visual structure). In addition to this tremendous advantage in resolution, visual cortex is plastic at many different levels ranging from a very local ability to learn to better detect electrical stimulation to higher levels of learning that permit human observers to adapt to radical changes to their visual inputs. We argue that the combination of the large magnification factor and the impressive ability of the cerebral cortex to learn to recognize arbitrary patterns, might outweigh the disadvantages of bypassing earlier processing stages and makes V1 a viable option for the restoration of vision.

Indexed as

Visual ProsthesisAnimalsCerebral CortexEvoked Potentials, VisualFovea CentralisHaplorhiniHumansNeuronal PlasticityVisual FieldsVisual PathwaysVisual PerceptionMagnification factorPlasticityPrimary visual cortexV1Vision restorationVisual prosthesis

Identifiers

PMID25449335
PMCPMC4400204

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.