ArticleFrontiers in computational neuroscience2021
Explaining Orientation Adaptation in V1 by Updating the State of a Spatial Model.
Article in Frontiers in computational neuroscience, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Alpha oscillations during sunscreen application associated with willingness to pay.Experimental brain research · 2026Article
- Artificial Visual System for Stereo-Orientation Recognition Based on Hubel-Wiesel Model.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this work, we extend an influential statistical model based on the spatial classical receptive field (CRF) and non-classical receptive field (nCRF) interactions (Coen-Cagli et al., 2012) to explain the typical orientation adaptation effects observed in V1. If we assume that the temporal adaptation modifies the "state" of the model, the spatial statistical model can explain all of the orientation adaptation effects in the context of neuronal output using small and large grating observed in neurophysiological experiments in V1. The "state" of the model represents the internal parameters such as the prior and the covariance trained on a mixed dataset that totally determine the response of the model. These two parameters, respectively, reflect the probability of the orientation component and the connectivity among neurons between CRF and nCRF. Specifically, we have two key findings: First, neural adapted results using a small grating that just covers the CRF can be predicted by the change of the prior of our model. Second, the change of the prior can also predict most of the observed results using a large grating that covers both CRF and nCRF of a neuron. However, the prediction of the novel attractive adaptation using large grating covering both CRF and nCRF also necessitates the involvement of a connectivity change of the center-surround RFs. In addition, our paper contributes a new prior-based winner-take-all (WTA) working mechanism derived from the statistical-based model to explain why and how all of these orientation adaptation effects can be predicted by relying on this spatial model without modifying its structure, a novel application of the spatial model. The research results show that adaptation may link time and space by changing the "state" of the neural system according to a specific adaptor. Furthermore, different forms of stimulus used for adaptation can cause various adaptation effects, such as an a priori shift or a connectivity change, depending on the specific stimulus size.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.