Neural Comp. NEW Faster Access
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Carreira-Perpiñán, M. A.
Right arrow Articles by Goodhill, G. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Carreira-Perpiñán, M. A.
Right arrow Articles by Goodhill, G. J.
(Neural Computation. 2002;14:1545-1560.)
© 2002 The MIT Press


Note

Are Visual Cortex Maps Optimized for Coverage?

Miguel Á. Carreira-Perpiñán

miguel{at}cns.georgetown.edu, Department of Neuroscience, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, D.C. 20007, U.S.A.

Geoffrey J. Goodhill

geoff{at}georgetown.edu, Department of Neuroscience, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, D.C. 20007, U.S.A.

The elegant regularity of maps of variables such as ocular dominance, orientation, and spatial frequency in primary visual cortex has prompted many people to suggest that their structure could be explained by an optimization principle. Up to now, the standard way to test this hypothesis has been to generate artificial maps by optimizing a hypothesized objective function and then to compare these artificial maps with real maps using a variety of quantitative criteria. If the artificial maps are similar to the real maps, this provides some evidence that the real cortex may be optimizing a similar function to the one hypothesized. Recently, a more direct method has been proposed for testing whether real maps represent local optima of an objective function (Swindale, Shoham, Grinvald, Bonhoeffer, & Hübener, 2000). In this approach, the value of the hypothesized function is calculated for a real map, and then the real map is perturbed in certain ways and the function recalculated. If each of these perturbations leads to a worsening of the function, it is tempting to conclude that the real map is quite likely to represent a local optimum of that function. In this article, we argue that such perturbation results provide only weak evidence in favor of the optimization hypothesis.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J. Neurophysiol.Home page
M. A. Carreira-Perpinan and G. J. Goodhill
Influence of Lateral Connections on the Structure of Cortical Maps
J Neurophysiol, November 1, 2004; 92(5): 2947 - 2959.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Neural Comput.Home page
N. V. Swindale, D. Shoham, A. Grinvald, T. Bonhoeffer, and M. Hubener
Reply to Carreira-Perpinan and Goodhill
Neural Comput., September 1, 2002; 14(9): 2053 - 2056.
[Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
J COGNITIVE NEUROSCIENCE NEURAL COMPUTATION MIT PRESS JOURNALS
Copyright © 2002 by The MIT Press.