Correlations without synchrony Export

@article{citeulike:3114384, abstract = {Peaks in spike train correlograms are usually taken as indicative of spike timing synchronization between neurons. Strictly speaking, however, a peak merely indicates that the two spike trains were not independent. Two biologically plausible ways of departing from independence that are capable of generating peaks very similar to spike timing peaks are described here: covariations over trials in response latency and covariations over trials in neuronal excitability. Since peaks due to these interactions can be similar to spike timing peaks, interpreting a correlogram may be a problem with ambiguous solutions. What peak shapes do latency or excitability interactions generate? When are they similar to spike timing peaks? When can they be ruled out from having caused an observed correlogram peak? These are the questions addressed here. The previous article in this issue proposes quantitative methods to tell cases apart when latency or excitability covariations cannot be ruled out.}, address = {Lab 126, Instituto de Fisiologia Celular S/N, Ciudad Universitaria, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, Apartado Postal 70-523 C.P. 04510, Lab 126, Mexico DF 04510 MEXICO. cbrody@ifcsun1.ifisiol.unam. mx.}, author = {Brody, C. D.}, citeulike-article-id = {3114384}, citeulike-linkout-0 = {http://view.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10490937}, citeulike-linkout-1 = {http://www.hubmed.org/display.cgi?uids=10490937}, day = {1}, issn = {0899-7667}, journal = {Neural computation}, keywords = {synchronization}, month = {October}, number = {7}, pages = {1537--1551}, posted-at = {2008-08-13 08:06:54}, priority = {2}, title = {Correlations without synchrony}, url = {http://view.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10490937}, volume = {11}, year = {1999} }

TY - JOUR ID - citeulike:3114384 L3 - citeulike-article-id:3114384 N2 - Peaks in spike train correlograms are usually taken as indicative of spike timing synchronization between neurons. Strictly speaking, however, a peak merely indicates that the two spike trains were not independent. Two biologically plausible ways of departing from independence that are capable of generating peaks very similar to spike timing peaks are described here: covariations over trials in response latency and covariations over trials in neuronal excitability. Since peaks due to these interactions can be similar to spike timing peaks, interpreting a correlogram may be a problem with ambiguous solutions. What peak shapes do latency or excitability interactions generate? When are they similar to spike timing peaks? When can they be ruled out from having caused an observed correlogram peak? These are the questions addressed here. The previous article in this issue proposes quantitative methods to tell cases apart when latency or excitability covariations cannot be ruled out. IS - 7 JF - Neural computation SN - 0899-7667 AD - Lab 126, Instituto de Fisiologia Celular S/N, Ciudad Universitaria, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, Apartado Postal 70-523 C.P. 04510, Lab 126, Mexico DF 04510 MEXICO. cbrody@ifcsun1.ifisiol.unam. mx. EP - 1551 TI - Correlations without synchrony VL - 11 SP - 1537 KW - synchronization AU - Brody, CD PY - 1999/10/01/ UR - http://view.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10490937 ER -