Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T10:53:54.917Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparison of contrast-normalization and threshold models of the responses of simple cells in cat striate cortex

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 June 2009

D. J. Tolhurst  and
D. J. Heeger
D. J. Tolhurst
Affiliation:
The Physiological Laboratory, Downing Street, Cambridge, CB2 3EG, U.K.
D. J. Heeger
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In almost every study of the linearity of spatiotemporal summation in simple cells of the cat's visual cortex, there have been systematic mismatches between the experimental observations and the predictions of the linear theory. These mismatches have generally been explained by supposing that the initial spatiotemporal summation stage is strictly linear, but that the following output stage of the simple cell is subject to some contrast-dependent nonlinearity. Two main models of the output nonlinearity have been proposed: the threshold model (e.g. Tolhurst & Dean, 1987) and the contrast-normalization model (e.g. Heeger, 1992a, b). In this paper, the two models are fitted rigorously to a variety of previously published neurophysiological data, in order to determine whether one model is a better explanation of the data. We reexamine data on the interaction between two bar stimuli presented in different parts of the receptive field; on the relationship between the receptive-field map and the inverse Fourier transform of the spatial-frequency tuning curve; on the dependence of response amplitude and phase on the spatial phase of stationary gratings; on the relationships between the responses to moving and modulated gratings; and on the suppressive action of gratings moving in a neuron's nonpreferred direction. In many situations, the predictions of the two models are similar, but the contrast-normalization model usually fits the data slightly better than the threshold model, and it is easier to apply the equations of the normalization model. More importantly, the normalization model is naturally able to account very well for the details and subtlety of the results in experiments where the total contrast energy of the stimuli changes; some of these phenomena are completely beyond the scope of the threshold model. Rigorous application of the models' equations has revealed some situations where neither model fits quite well enough, and we must suppose, therefore, that there are some subtle nonlinearities still to be characterized.

Keywords

Visual cortexSimple cellsThresholdsLinear summationContrast normalizationNonlinear responsesResponse suppressionDirectional selectivity
Type
Research Articles
Information
Visual Neuroscience , Volume 14 , Issue 2 , March 1997 , pp. 293 - 309
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1997

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Albrecht, D.G. (1995). Visual cortex neurons in monkey and cat: Effect of contrast on the spatial and temporal phase transfer functions. Visual Neuroscience 12, 1191–1210.Google Scholar
Albrecht, D.G. & Geisler, W.S. (1991). Motion selectivity and the contrast-response function of simple cells in the visual cortex. Visual Neuroscience 7, 531–546.Google Scholar
Albrecht, D.G. & Hamilton, D.B. (1982). Striate cortex of monkey and cat: Contrast response function. Journal of Neurophysiology 48, 217–237.Google Scholar
Andrews, B.W. & Pollen, D.A. (1979). Relationship between spatial frequency selectivity and receptive field profile of simple cells. Journal of Physiology 287, 163–176.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Atick, J.J. & Redlich, A.N. (1990). Mathematical model of the simple cells in the visual cortex. Biological Cybernetics 63, 99–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bauman, L.A. & Bonds, A.B. (1991). Inhibitory refinement of spatial frequency selectivity in single cells of the cat striate cortex. Vision Research 31, 933–944.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bonds, A.B. (1989). Role of inhibition in the specification of orientation selectivity of cells in the cat striate cortex. Visual Neuroscience 2, 41–55.Google Scholar
Carandini, M. & Heeger, D.J. (1994). Summation and division by neurons in primate visual cortex. Science 264, 1333–1336.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carandini, M., Heeger, D.J. & Movshon, J.A. (1997). Linearity and gain control in VI simple cells. In Cerebral Cortex, Vol.XII, Cortical Models, ed. Jones, E.G. & Ulinski, P.S., New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
Dean, A.F. (1981a). The relationship between response amplitude and contrast for cat striate cortical neurones. Journal of Physiology 318, 413–427.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dean, A.F. (1981b). The variability of discharge of simple cells in the cat striate cortex. Experimental Brain Research 44, 437–440.Google Scholar
Dean, A.F. & Tolhurst, D.J. (1983). On the distinctness of simple and complex cells in the visual cortex of the cat. Journal of Physiology 344, 305–325.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dean, A.F., Hess, R.F. & Tolhurst, D.J. (1980). Divisive inhibition involved in directional selectivity. Journal of Physiology 308, 84–85P.Google Scholar
DeAngelis, G.C., Ohzawa, I. & Freeman, R.D. (1993). Spatiotemporal organization of simple-cell receptive fields in the cat's striate cortex. II, Linearity of temporal and spatial summation. Journal of Neurophysiology 69, 1118–1135.Google Scholar
DeAngelis, G.C., Robson, J.G., Ohzawa, I. & Freeman, R.D. (1992). Organization of suppression in receptive fields of neurons in cat visual cortex. Journal of Neurophysiology 68, 144–163.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
De Valois, K. & Tootell, R. (1983). Spatial-frequency specific inhibition in cat striate cortex cells. Journal of Physiology 336, 359–376.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
De Valois, R.L., Albrecht, D.G. & Thorell, L.G. (1978). Cortical cells: Bar and edge detectors or spatial-frequency analyzers. In Frontiers in Visual Science, ed. Cool, S.J. & Smith, E.L., pp. 544–556. New York: Springer Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Valois, R.L., Thorell, L.G. & Albrecht, D.G. (1985). Periodicity of striate cortex cell receptive fields. Journal of the Optical Society of America A, 2, 1115–1123.Google Scholar
Emerson, R.C. & Huang, M.C. (1997). Quadrature subunits in direction-ally selective simple cells: Counterphase and drifting grating responses. Visual Neuroscience 14, 373–385.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Enroth-Cugell, C. & Robson, J.G. (1966). The contrast sensitivity of retinal ganglion cells of the cat. Journal of Physiology 187, 517–552.Google Scholar
Ferster, D. (1988). Spatially opponent excitation and inhibition in simple cells of the cat visual cortex. Journal of Neuroscience 8, 1172–1180.Google Scholar
Ferster, D. & Jagadeesh, B. (1992). EPSP-IPSP interactions in cat visual cortex studied with in vivo whole-cell patch recording. Journal of Neuroscience 12, 1262–1274.Google Scholar
Geisler, W.S. & Albrecht, D.G. (1992). Cortical neurons: Isolation of contrast gain control. Vision Research 32, 1409–1410.Google Scholar
Geisler, W.S. & Albrecht, D.G. (1995). Bayesian analysis of identification performance in monkey visual cortex: Nonlinear mechanisms and stimulus certainty. Vision Research 35, 2723–2730.Google Scholar
Glezer, V.D., Tsherbach, T.A., Gauselman, V.E. & Bondarko, V.M. (1982). Spatiotemporal organization of receptive fields of the cat striate cortex. Biological Cybernetics 43, 35–49.Google Scholar
Grossberg, S. (1988). Nonlinear neural networks: Principles, mechanisms and architectures. Neural Networks 1, 17–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gulyas, B., Orban, G., Duysens, J. & Maes, H. (1987). The suppressive influence of moving textured backgrounds on responses of cat striate cortex neurons to moving bars. Journal of Neurophysiology 57, 1767–1791.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hamilton, D.B., Albrecht, D.G. & Geisler, W.S. (1989). Visual cortical receptive fields in monkey and cat: Spatial and temporal phase transfer function. Vision Research 29, 1285–1308.Google Scholar
Hammond, P. & MacKay, D.M. (1981). Modulatory influences of moving textured backgrounds on responsiveness of simple cells in feline striate cortex. Journal of Physiology 319, 431–442.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Heeger, D.J. (1991). Nonlinear model of neural responses in cat visual cortex. In Computational Models of Visual Processing, ed. Landy, M. & Movshon, J.A., pp. 119–133. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Heeger, D.J. (1992 a). Normalization of cell responses in cat striate cortex. Visual Neuroscience 9, 181–197.Google Scholar
Heeger, D.J. (1992b). Half-squaring in responses of cat simple cells. Visual Neuroscience 9, 427–443.Google Scholar
Heeger, D.J. (1993). Modeling simple-cell direction selectivity with normalized, half-squared, linear operators. Journal of Neurophysiology 70, 1885–1898.Google Scholar
Hubel, D.H. & Wiesel, T.N. (1959). Receptive fields of single neurones in the cat's striate cortex. Journal of Physiology 148, 574–591.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ikeda, H. & Wright, M.J. (1974). Sensitivity of neurones in visual cortex (area 17) under different levels of anaesthesia. Experimental Brain Research 20, 471–484.Google Scholar
Jagadeesh, B., Gray, C.M. & Ferster, D. (1992). Visually evoked oscillations of membrane potential in cells of cat visual cortex. Science 257, 552–554.Google Scholar
Jagadeesh, B., Wheat, H.S. & Ferster, D. (1993). Linearity of summation of synaptic potentials underlying direction selectivity in simple cells of the cat visual cortex. Science 262, 1901–1904.Google Scholar
Jones, J.P. & Palmer, L.A. (1987). An evaluation of the two-dimensional Gabor filter model of simple receptive fields in the cat striate cortex. Journal of Neurophysiology 58, 1233–1258.Google Scholar
Koike, H., Mano, N., Okada, Y. & Oshima, T. (1970). Repetitive impulses generated in fast and slow pyramidal tract cells by intracellularly applied current steps. Experimental Brain Research 11, 263–281.Google Scholar
Kulikowski, J.J. & Bishop, P.O. (1981). Linear analysis of the responses of simple cells in cat striate cortex. Experimental Brain Research 44, 386–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, C.-Y. & Creutzfeldt, O. (1984). The representation of contrast and other stimulus parameters by single neurons in area 17 of the cat. Pflügers Archives 401, 304–314.Google Scholar
Maffei, L. & Fiorentini, A. (1973). The visual cortex as a spatial frequency analyzer. Vision Research 13, 1255–1267.Google Scholar
Maffei, L. & Fiorentini, A. (1976). The unresponsive regions of visual cortical receptive fields. Vision Research 16, 1131–1139.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Maffei, L., Morrone, M.C., Pirchio, M. & Sandini, G. (1979). Responses of visual cortical cells to periodic and non-periodic stimuli. Journal of Physiology 296, 27–47.Google Scholar
Marr, D. (1970). A theory for cerebral neocortex. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 176, 161–234.Google Scholar
Mason, A. & Larkman, A.U. (1990). Correlations between morphology and electrophysiology of pyramidal neurons in slices of rat visual cortex. II. Electrophysiology. Journal of Neuroscience 10, 1415–1428.Google Scholar
McCormick, D.A., Connors, B.W., Lighthall, J.W. & Prince, D.A. (1985). Comparative electrophysiology of pyramidal and sparsely spiny stellate neurons of the neocortex. Journal of Neurophysiology 54, 782–806.Google Scholar
McLean, J., Raab, S. & Palmer, L.A. (1994). Contribution of linear mechanisms to the specification of local motion by simple cells in areas 17 & 18 of the cat. Visual Neuroscience 11, 271–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morrone, M.C., Burr, D.C. & Maffei, L. (1982). Functional implications of cross-orientation inhibition of cortical visual cells. I. Neuro-physiological evidence. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 216, 335–354.Google Scholar
Movshon, J.A., Thompson, I.D. & Tolhurst, D.J. (1978 a). Spatial summation in the receptive fields of simple cells in the cat's striate cortex. Journal of Physiology 283, 53–77.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Movshon, J.A., Thompson, I.D. & Tolhurst, D.J. (1978 b). Spatial and temporal contrast sensitivity of neurones in areas 17 and 18 of the cat's visual cortex. Journal of Physiology 283, 101–120.Google Scholar
Mullikin, W.H., Jones, J.P. & Palmer, L.A. (1984). Receptive-field properties and laminar distribution of X-like and Y-like simple cells in cat area 17. Journal of Neurophysiology 52, 350–371.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nestares, O. & Heeger, D.J. (1997). Modeling the apparent frequency-specific suppression in simple cell responses. Vision Research (in press).Google Scholar
Ogawa, T., Ito, S. & Kato, H. (1981). Membrane characteristics of visual cortical neurons in in vitro slices. Brain Research 226, 315–329.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ohzawa, I., Sclar, G. & Freeman, R.D. (1982). Contrast gain control in the cat visual cortex. Nature 298, 266–268.Google Scholar
Palmer, L.A. & Davis, T.L. (1981). Receptive field structure in cat striate cortex. Journal of Neurophysiology 46, 260–276.Google Scholar
Pollen, D.A., Gaska, J.P. & Jacobson, L.D. (1988). Responses of simple and complex cells to compound sine-wave gratings. Vision Research 28, 25–39.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Press, W.H., Flannery, B.P., Teukolsky, S.A. & Vetterling, W.T. (1986). Numerical Recipes: The Art of Scientific Computing. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Reid, R.C., Soodak, R.E. & Shapley, R.M. (1987). Linear mechanisms of directional selectivity in simple cells of cat striate cortex. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the U.S.A. 84, 8740–8744.Google Scholar
Reid, R.C., Soodak, R.E. & Shapley, R.M. (1991). Directional selectivity and spatiotemporal structure of receptive fields of simple cells in cat striate cortex. Journal of Neurophysiology 66, 505–529.Google Scholar
Robson, J.G. (1988). Linear and non-linear operations in the visual system. Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science (Suppl.) 29, 117.Google Scholar
Robson, J.G., Tolhurst, D.J., Freeman, R.D. & Ohzawa, I. (1988). Simple cells in the visual cortex of the cat can be narrowly tuned for spatial frequency. Visual Neuroscience 1, 415–419.Google Scholar
Schumer, R.A. & Movshon, J.A. (1984). Length summation in simple cells of cat striate cortex. Vision Research 24, 565–571.Google Scholar
Shapley, R.M., Reid, R.C. & Soodak, R. (1991). Spatiotemporal receptive fields and direction selectivity. In Computational Models of Visual Processing, ed. Landy, M. & Movshon, J.A., pp. 109–118. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Skottun, B.C., Bradley, A., Sclar, G., Ohzawa, I. & Freeman, R.D. (1987). The effects of contrast on visual orientation and spatial frequency discrimination: A comparison of single cells and behavior. Journal of Neurophysiology 57, 773–786.Google Scholar
Tadmor, Y. & Tolhurst, D.J. (1989). The effect of threshold on the relationship between the receptive-field profile and the spatial-frequency tuning curve in simple cells of the cat's striate cortex. Visual Neuroscience 3, 445–454.Google Scholar
Tolhurst, D.J. (1989). The amount of information transmitted about contrast by neurones in the cat's visual cortex. Visual Neuroscience 2, 409–413.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tolhurst, D.J. & Dean, A.F. (1987). Spatial summation by simple cells in the striate cortex of the cat. Experimental Brain Research 66, 607–620.Google Scholar
Tolhurst, D.J. & Dean, A.F. (1990). The effects of contrast on the linearity of spatial summation of simple cells in the cat's striate cortex. Experimental Brain Research 79, 582–588.Google Scholar
Tolhurst, D.J. & Dean, A.F. (1991). Evaluation of a linear model of directional selectivity in simple cells of the cat's striate cortex. Visual Neuroscience 6, 421–428.Google Scholar
Tolhurst, D.J. & Heeger, D.J. (1997). Contrast normalization and a linear model for the directional selectivity of simple cells in cat striate cortex. Visual Neuroscience 14, 19–25.Google Scholar
Tolhurst, D.J. & Thompson, I.D. (1981). On the variety of spatial-frequency selectivities shown by neurons in area 17 of the cat. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 213, 183–199.Google Scholar
Tolhurst, D.J., Movshon, J.A. & Dean, A.F. (1983). The statistical reliability of single neurons in cat and monkey visual cortex. Vision Research 23, 775–785.Google Scholar
Tolhurst, D.J., Movshon, J.A. & Thompson, I.D. (1981). The dependence of response amplitude and variance of cat visual cortical neurones on stimulus contrast. Experimental Brain Research 41, 414–419.Google Scholar
Vogels, R., Spileers, W. & Orban, G.A. (1989). The response variability of striate cortical neurons in behaving monkey. Experimental Brain Research 77, 432–436.Google Scholar
Webster, M.A. & De Valois, R.L. (1985). Relationship between spatial-frequency & orientation tuning of striate-cortex cells. Journal of the Optical Society of America A 2, 1124–1132.Google Scholar