ArticlePLoS computational biology2023
Normalization by orientation-tuned surround in human V1-V3.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2023. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- How does orientation-tuned normalization spread across the visual field?Journal of neurophysiology · 2025Article
- Feature-specific divisive normalization improves natural image encoding for depth perception.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
An influential account of neuronal responses in primary visual cortex is the normalized energy model. This model is often implemented as a multi-stage computation. The first stage is linear filtering. The second stage is the extraction of contrast energy, whereby a complex cell computes the squared and summed outputs of a pair of the linear filters in quadrature phase. The third stage is normalization, in which a local population of complex cells mutually inhibit one another. Because the population includes cells tuned to a range of orientations and spatial frequencies, the result is that the responses are effectively normalized by the local stimulus contrast. Here, using evidence from human functional MRI, we show that the classical model fails to account for the relative responses to two classes of stimuli: straight, parallel, band-passed contours (gratings), and curved, band-passed contours (snakes). The snakes elicit fMRI responses that are about twice as large as the gratings, yet a traditional divisive normalization model predicts responses that are about the same. Motivated by these observations and others from the literature, we implement a divisive normalization model in which cells matched in orientation tuning ("tuned normalization") preferentially inhibit each other. We first show that this model accounts for differential responses to these two classes of stimuli. We then show that the model successfully generalizes to other band-pass textures, both in V1 and in extrastriate cortex (V2 and V3). We conclude that even in primary visual cortex, complex features of images such as the degree of heterogeneity, can have large effects on neural responses.
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.