Finally, we computed each decoder’s
predictions for MT-pursuit correlations with the same analysis procedures we had applied to our recordings from area MT. Most of the decoding computations we used are structured as “vector averaging,” a family of decoding computations that can reproduce much of pursuit behavior, defined by S→ in Equation 1. Vector averaging computes the vector sum of MT responses (R i) weighted by their preferred speed (s i) and a unit vector in their preferred direction ( θ→i) in the numerator; it divides by the sum of MT responses for normalization: equation(Equation 1) S→=∑iRiθ→isi∑jRj The equations for our decoders, by using the subscripts i versus j in the numerator and denominator, include the possibility of using different populations of model neurons for the numerator and denominator. This feature allows implementation of the principle that normalization might be based on an estimate rather Gefitinib than a calculation of total population activity ( Chaisanguanthum and Lisberger, 2011). It also allows
http://www.selleckchem.com/products/AZD0530.html us to explore the new idea that there need not be neuron-neuron correlations between the populations of model units that contribute to the population vector sum and the normalization. In all models, however, we created neuron-neuron correlations within the numerator or denominator populations. There were two important ingredients of decoding models that predicted our data successfully. One was an opponent Adenosine triphosphate computation in the numerator, to create different signs of MT-pursuit correlations for neurons with preferred directions near versus opposite to the direction of target motion. The other was the lack of correlation between the model neurons that contribute to the weighted population vector in the numerator versus the normalization in the denominator, to create mostly positive MT-pursuit correlations for neurons with preferred directions within 90 degrees of target direction. Figure 4B provided a good qualitative match to the data in Figure 4A, for a form of vector averaging
that used opponent motion signals in the numerator and the sum of activity in a different population of model neurons in the denominator (Churchland and Lisberger, 2001, Huang and Lisberger, 2009 and Yang and Lisberger, 2009): equation(Equation 2) sh=∑icos(θi)Rilog2(si)k∑jRj equation(Equation 3) sv=∑isin(θi)Rilog2(si)k∑jRj equation(Equation 4) s=2sh2+sv2 We created opponent motion signals by weighting responses by the sine and cosine of preferred direction (Equations (Equation 2) and (Equation 3)), effectively computing: the response of a model unit with a given preferred direction minus the response of a model unit with the same preferred speed but the opposite preferred direction. Horizontal and vertical eye speeds sh and sv were decoded separately and combined to obtain the speed s ( Equation 4).