Alexander/P-unit_model
2
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Releases Wiki Activity

a lot

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
a.ott
2020-09-04 17:54:29 +02:00
parent be35a13226
commit ad016b169b
20 changed files with 1158 additions and 477 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

16
thesis/Masterthesis.aux
View File

@@ -32,8 +32,8 @@
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsection}{\numberline {4.1}Cell recordings}{5}{subsection.4.1}}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsection}{\numberline {4.2}Stimulus Protocols}{6}{subsection.4.2}}
\newlabel{eq:am_generation}{{1}{6}{Stimulus Protocols}{equation.4.1}{}}
\newlabel{fig:stim_examples}{{2}{6}{Example of the stimulus construction. At the top a recording of the fish's EOD. In the middle a part of the recording multiplied with the AM, a step with a contrast of 130\% between 0 and 50\,ms (marked in \todo {color}). At the bottom the resulting stimulus trace when the AM is added to the EOD. This example stimulus is for visualization purposes 50\,ms short. During the measurements the stimulus was 0.4\,s or 1\,s long}{figure.2}{}}
\@writefile{lof}{\contentsline {figure}{\numberline {2}{\ignorespaces Example of the stimulus construction. At the top a recording of the fish's EOD. In the middle a part of the recording multiplied with the AM, a step with a contrast of 130\% between 0 and 50\tmspace +\thinmuskip {.1667em}ms (marked in {\color {red}(TODO: color)}). At the bottom the resulting stimulus trace when the AM is added to the EOD. This example stimulus is for visualization purposes 50\tmspace +\thinmuskip {.1667em}ms short. During the measurements the stimulus was 0.4\tmspace +\thinmuskip {.1667em}s or 1\tmspace +\thinmuskip {.1667em}s long. }}{6}{figure.2}}
\newlabel{fig:stim_examples}{{2}{6}{Example of the stimulus construction. At the top a recording of the fish's EOD. In the middle: EOD recording multiplied with the AM, with a step from 0 to a contrast of 30\,\% between 0 and 50\,ms (marked in \todo {color}). At the bottom the resulting stimulus trace when the AM is added to the EOD. \todo {Umformulieren}}{figure.2}{}}
\@writefile{lof}{\contentsline {figure}{\numberline {2}{\ignorespaces Example of the stimulus construction. At the top a recording of the fish's EOD. In the middle: EOD recording multiplied with the AM, with a step from 0 to a contrast of 30\tmspace +\thinmuskip {.1667em}\% between 0 and 50\tmspace +\thinmuskip {.1667em}ms (marked in {\color {red}(TODO: color)}). At the bottom the resulting stimulus trace when the AM is added to the EOD. {\color {red}(TODO: Umformulieren)}}}{6}{figure.2}}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsection}{\numberline {4.3}Cell Characteristics}{6}{subsection.4.3}}
\newlabel{eq:CV}{{2}{7}{Cell Characteristics}{equation.4.2}{}}
\newlabel{eq:VS}{{3}{7}{Cell Characteristics}{equation.4.3}{}}
@@ -42,6 +42,7 @@
\newlabel{fig:f_point_detection}{{3}{8}{\todo {place right in text}On the left: The averaged response of a cell to a step in EOD amplitude. The beginning (at 0\,s) and end (at 1\,s) of the stimulus are marked by the gray lines. The detected values for the onset ($f_0$) and steady-state ($f_{inf}$) response are marked in \todo {color}. $f_0$ is detected as the highest deviation from the mean frequency before the stimulus while $f_{inf}$ is the average frequency in the 0.1\,s time window, 25\,ms before the end of the stimulus. On the right: The fi-curve visualizes the onset and steady-state response of the neuron for different stimuli contrasts. In \todo {color} the detected onset responses and the fitted Boltzmann, in \todo {color} the detected steady-state response and the linear fit}{figure.3}{}}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsection}{\numberline {4.4}Leaky Integrate and Fire Model}{8}{subsection.4.4}}
\citation{benda2010linear}
\citation{benda2005spike}
\newlabel{eq:basic_voltage_dynamics}{{5}{9}{Leaky Integrate and Fire Model}{equation.4.5}{}}
\newlabel{eq:adaption_dynamics}{{6}{9}{Leaky Integrate and Fire Model}{equation.4.6}{}}
\newlabel{eq:currents_lifac}{{7}{9}{Leaky Integrate and Fire Model}{equation.4.7}{}}
@@ -55,11 +56,12 @@
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsection}{\numberline {4.5}Fitting of the Model}{11}{subsection.4.5}}
\citation{gao2012implementing}
\bibdata{citations}
\bibcite{benda2010linear}{{1}{2010}{{Benda et~al.}}{{}}}
\bibcite{gao2012implementing}{{2}{2012}{{Gao and Han}}{{}}}
\bibcite{todd1999identification}{{3}{1999}{{Todd and Andrews}}{{}}}
\bibcite{walz2013Phd}{{4}{2013}{{Walz}}{{}}}
\bibcite{walz2014static}{{5}{2014}{{Walz et~al.}}{{}}}
\bibcite{benda2005spike}{{1}{2005}{{Benda et~al.}}{{}}}
\bibcite{benda2010linear}{{2}{2010}{{Benda et~al.}}{{}}}
\bibcite{gao2012implementing}{{3}{2012}{{Gao and Han}}{{}}}
\bibcite{todd1999identification}{{4}{1999}{{Todd and Andrews}}{{}}}
\bibcite{walz2013Phd}{{5}{2013}{{Walz}}{{}}}
\bibcite{walz2014static}{{6}{2014}{{Walz et~al.}}{{}}}
\bibstyle{apalike}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {section}{\numberline {5}Results}{12}{section.5}}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {section}{\numberline {6}Discussion}{12}{section.6}}

6
thesis/Masterthesis.bbl
View File

@@ -1,5 +1,11 @@
\begin{thebibliography}{}
\bibitem[Benda et~al., 2005]{benda2005spike}
Benda, J., Longtin, A., and Maler, L. (2005).
\newblock Spike-frequency adaptation separates transient communication signals
from background oscillations.
\newblock {\em Journal of Neuroscience}, 25(9):2312--2321.
\bibitem[Benda et~al., 2010]{benda2010linear}
Benda, J., Maler, L., and Longtin, A. (2010).
\newblock Linear versus nonlinear signal transmission in neuron models with

62
thesis/Masterthesis.blg
View File

@@ -1,46 +1,46 @@
This is BibTeX, Version 0.99d (TeX Live 2017/Debian)
Capacity: max_strings=100000, hash_size=100000, hash_prime=85009
This is BibTeX, Version 0.99d (TeX Live 2015/Debian)
Capacity: max_strings=35307, hash_size=35307, hash_prime=30011
The top-level auxiliary file: Masterthesis.aux
The style file: apalike.bst
Database file #1: citations.bib
You've used 5 entries,
You've used 6 entries,
1935 wiz_defined-function locations,
508 strings with 4630 characters,
and the built_in function-call counts, 1968 in all, are:
= -- 199
> -- 69
517 strings with 4845 characters,
and the built_in function-call counts, 2415 in all, are:
= -- 244
> -- 87
< -- 3
+ -- 24
- -- 22
* -- 176
:= -- 346
add.period$ -- 15
call.type$ -- 5
change.case$ -- 35
chr.to.int$ -- 5
cite$ -- 5
duplicate$ -- 68
empty$ -- 140
format.name$ -- 31
if$ -- 375
+ -- 30
- -- 28
* -- 219
:= -- 422
add.period$ -- 18
call.type$ -- 6
change.case$ -- 43
chr.to.int$ -- 6
cite$ -- 6
duplicate$ -- 82
empty$ -- 172
format.name$ -- 38
if$ -- 461
int.to.chr$ -- 1
int.to.str$ -- 0
missing$ -- 4
newline$ -- 28
num.names$ -- 15
pop$ -- 24
missing$ -- 5
newline$ -- 33
num.names$ -- 18
pop$ -- 30
preamble$ -- 1
purify$ -- 36
purify$ -- 44
quote$ -- 0
skip$ -- 53
skip$ -- 63
stack$ -- 0
substring$ -- 168
swap$ -- 5
substring$ -- 211
swap$ -- 6
text.length$ -- 0
text.prefix$ -- 0
top$ -- 0
type$ -- 30
type$ -- 36
warning$ -- 0
while$ -- 18
while$ -- 22
width$ -- 0
write$ -- 67
write$ -- 80

51
thesis/Masterthesis.log
View File

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
This is pdfTeX, Version 3.14159265-2.6-1.40.16 (TeX Live 2015/Debian) (preloaded format=pdflatex 2018.11.12) 1 SEP 2020 15:07
This is pdfTeX, Version 3.14159265-2.6-1.40.16 (TeX Live 2015/Debian) (preloaded format=pdflatex 2018.11.12) 4 SEP 2020 10:57
entering extended mode
restricted \write18 enabled.
%&-line parsing enabled.
@@ -520,12 +520,9 @@ LaTeX Font Info: Font shape `OMS/cmr/m/n' in size <12> not available
File: figures/p_unit_example.png Graphic file (type png)
<use figures/p_unit_example.png>
Package pdftex.def Info: figures/p_unit_example.png used on input line 129.
Package pdftex.def Info: figures/p_unit_example.png used on input line 133.
(pdftex.def) Requested size: 409.71692pt x 409.73999pt.
[3] [4 <./figures/p_unit_example.png>]
(/usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/tex/latex/ucs/data/uni-32.def
File: uni-32.def 2013/05/13 UCS: Unicode data U+2000..U+20FF
)
(/usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/tex/latex/ucs/data/uni-34.def
File: uni-34.def 2013/05/13 UCS: Unicode data U+2200..U+22FF
) [5]
@@ -533,57 +530,57 @@ File: uni-34.def 2013/05/13 UCS: Unicode data U+2200..U+22FF
File: figures/amGeneration.pdf Graphic file (type pdf)
<use figures/amGeneration.pdf>
Package pdftex.def Info: figures/amGeneration.pdf used on input line 188.
Package pdftex.def Info: figures/amGeneration.pdf used on input line 192.
(pdftex.def) Requested size: 204.85846pt x 204.86006pt.
File: figures/amGeneration.pdf Graphic file (type pdf)
<use figures/amGeneration.pdf>
Package pdftex.def Info: figures/amGeneration.pdf used on input line 188.
Package pdftex.def Info: figures/amGeneration.pdf used on input line 192.
(pdftex.def) Requested size: 204.85846pt x 204.86006pt.
File: figures/amGeneration.pdf Graphic file (type pdf)
<use figures/amGeneration.pdf>
Package pdftex.def Info: figures/amGeneration.pdf used on input line 188.
Package pdftex.def Info: figures/amGeneration.pdf used on input line 192.
(pdftex.def) Requested size: 204.85846pt x 204.86006pt.
[6 <./figures/amGeneration.pdf>]
<figures/f_point_detection.png, id=154, 433.62pt x 289.08pt>
<figures/f_point_detection.png, id=155, 433.62pt x 289.08pt>
File: figures/f_point_detection.png Graphic file (type png)
<use figures/f_point_detection.png>
Package pdftex.def Info: figures/f_point_detection.png used on input line 264.
Package pdftex.def Info: figures/f_point_detection.png used on input line 267.
(pdftex.def) Requested size: 301.37201pt x 208.5021pt.
[7] [8 <./figures/f_point_detection.png>]
<figures/model_comparison.pdf, id=185, 578.16pt x 578.16pt>
<figures/model_comparison.pdf, id=187, 578.16pt x 578.16pt>
File: figures/model_comparison.pdf Graphic file (type pdf)
<use figures/model_comparison.pdf>
Package pdftex.def Info: figures/model_comparison.pdf used on input line 312.
Package pdftex.def Info: figures/model_comparison.pdf used on input line 315.
(pdftex.def) Requested size: 346.89867pt x 346.89867pt.
[9]
<figures/stimulus_development.pdf, id=196, 433.62pt x 433.62pt>
<figures/stimulus_development.pdf, id=200, 433.62pt x 433.62pt>
File: figures/stimulus_development.pdf Graphic file (type pdf)
<use figures/stimulus_development.pdf>
Package pdftex.def Info: figures/stimulus_development.pdf used on input line 33
0.
3.
(pdftex.def) Requested size: 260.17401pt x 260.17401pt.
[10 <./figures/model_comparison.pdf>]
[11 <./figures/stimulus_development.pdf>] (./Masterthesis.bbl)
Package atveryend Info: Empty hook `BeforeClearDocument' on input line 412.
Package atveryend Info: Empty hook `BeforeClearDocument' on input line 414.
[12]
Package atveryend Info: Empty hook `AfterLastShipout' on input line 412.
Package atveryend Info: Empty hook `AfterLastShipout' on input line 414.
(./Masterthesis.aux)
Package atveryend Info: Executing hook `AtVeryEndDocument' on input line 412.
Package atveryend Info: Executing hook `AtEndAfterFileList' on input line 412.
Package atveryend Info: Executing hook `AtVeryEndDocument' on input line 414.
Package atveryend Info: Executing hook `AtEndAfterFileList' on input line 414.
Package rerunfilecheck Info: File `Masterthesis.out' has not changed.
(rerunfilecheck) Checksum: 7A3ACD7CD7DC89195072057BF8EFCD4A;622.
Package atveryend Info: Empty hook `AtVeryVeryEnd' on input line 412.
Package atveryend Info: Empty hook `AtVeryVeryEnd' on input line 414.
)
Here is how much of TeX's memory you used:
11126 strings out of 493029
158645 string characters out of 6136233
267205 words of memory out of 5000000
14484 multiletter control sequences out of 15000+600000
10879 strings out of 493029
155891 string characters out of 6136233
264880 words of memory out of 5000000
14239 multiletter control sequences out of 15000+600000
9214 words of font info for 33 fonts, out of 8000000 for 9000
1141 hyphenation exceptions out of 8191
37i,16n,38p,1246b,551s stack positions out of 5000i,500n,10000p,200000b,80000s
@@ -598,10 +595,10 @@ ublic/amsfonts/cm/cmr8.pfb></usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/fonts/type1/public/am
sfonts/cm/cmsy10.pfb></usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/fonts/type1/public/amsfonts
/cm/cmsy8.pfb></usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/fonts/type1/public/amsfonts/cm/cmt
i12.pfb>
Output written on Masterthesis.pdf (13 pages, 328132 bytes).
Output written on Masterthesis.pdf (13 pages, 327767 bytes).
PDF statistics:
341 PDF objects out of 1000 (max. 8388607)
218 compressed objects within 3 object streams
49 named destinations out of 1000 (max. 500000)
345 PDF objects out of 1000 (max. 8388607)
222 compressed objects within 3 object streams
50 named destinations out of 1000 (max. 500000)
114 words of extra memory for PDF output out of 10000 (max. 10000000)

BIN
thesis/Masterthesis.pdf
View File

Binary file not shown.

BIN
thesis/Masterthesis.synctex.gz
View File

Binary file not shown.

48
thesis/Masterthesis.tex
View File

@@ -117,6 +117,10 @@ Außerdem erkläre ich, dass die eingereichte Arbeit weder vollständig noch in
\section{Introduction}
%\begin{figure}[H]
%\floatbox[{\capbeside\thisfloatsetup{capbesideposition={left,top},capbesidewidth=0.49\textwidth}}]{figure}[\FBwidth]
%{\caption{\label{fig:p_unit_example} Example behavior of a p-unit with a high baseline firing rate. Baseline Firing: A 100\,ms voltage trace of the recording with spikes marked by the black lines. ISI-histogram: The histogram of the ISI with the x-axis in EOD periods, showing the phase locking of the firing. Serial Correlation: The serial correlation of the ISI showing a negative correlation for lags one and two. Step Response: The response of the p-unit to a step increase in EOD amplitude. In \todo{color} the averaged frequency over 10 trials and in \todo{color} smoothed with an running average with a window of 10\,ms. The p-unit strongly reacts to the onset of the stimulus but very quickly adapts to the new stimulus and then shows a steady state response. FI-Curve: The fi-curve visualizes the onset and steady-state response of the neuron for different step sizes (contrasts). In \todo{color} the detected onset responses and the fitted Boltzmann, in %\todo{color} the detected steady-state response and the linear fit.}}
@@ -150,16 +154,16 @@ Außerdem erkläre ich, dass die eingereichte Arbeit weder vollständig noch in
% EOD-freq: min 601.09, mean 753.09, max 928.45, std 82.30
% Sizes: min 11.00, mean 15.78, max 25.00, std 3.48
The cell recordings for this master thesis were collected as part of other previous studies (\cite{walz2013Phd}, \citep{walz2014static})\todo{ref other studies} and is described there but will also be repeated below. The recordings of 457 p-units were inspected. Of those 88 fulfilled the basic necessary requirements: including a measurement of at least 30 seconds of the baseline behavior and containing at least 7 different contrasts with each at least 7 trials for the FI-Curve (see below \todo{ref fi-curve? }). After pre-analysis of those cells an additional 13 cells were excluded because of analysis difficulties.
The cell recordings for this master thesis were collected as part of other previous studies (\cite{walz2013Phd}, \citep{walz2014static})\todo{ref other studies} and the recording procedure is described there but will also be repeated below. The recordings of altogether 457 p-units were inspected. Of those 88 fulfilled basic necessary requirements: including a measurement of at least 30 seconds of baseline behavior and containing at least 7 different contrasts with each at least 7 trials for the f-I curve (see below \todo{ref fi-curve? }). After pre-analysis of those cells an additional 15 cells were excluded because of spike detection difficulties.
The 75 used cells came from 32 \AptLepto (brown ghost knifefish). The fish were between 11-25\,cm long (15.78 $\pm$ 3.48\,cm) and their electric organ discharge (EOD) frequencies were between 601-928\,Hz (753.1 $\pm$ 82.3\,Hz). The gender of the fish was not determined.
The 73 used cells came from 32 \AptLepto (brown ghost knifefish). The fish were between 11--25\,cm long (15.8 $\pm$ 3.5\,cm) and their electric organ discharge (EOD) frequencies ranged between 601 and 928\,Hz (753 $\pm$ 82\,Hz). The sex of the fish was not determined.
The in vivo intracellular recordings of P-unit electroreceptors were done in the lateral line nerve . The fish were anesthetized with MS-222 (100-130 mg/l; PharmaQ; Fordingbridge, UK) and the part of the skin covering the lateral line just behind the skull was removed, while the area was anesthetized with Lidocaine (2\%; bela-pharm; Vechta, Germany). The fish were immobilized for the recordings with Tubocurarine (Sigma-Aldrich; Steinheim, Germany, 25–50\,$\mu l$ of 5\,mg/ml solution) and placed in the experimental tank (47 $\times$ 42 $\times$ 12\,cm) filled with water from the fish's home tank with a conductivity of about 300$\mu$\,S/cm and the temperature was around 28°C.
All experimental protocols were approved and complied with national and regional laws (files: no. 55.2-1-54-2531-135-09 and Regierungspräsidium Tübingen no. ZP 1/13 and no. ZP 1/16 \todo{andere antrags nummern so richtig ?})
For the recordings a standard glass mircoelectrode (borosilicate; 1.5 mm outer diameter; GB150F-8P, Science Products, Hofheim, Germany) was used. They were pulled to a resistance of 50-100\,M$\Omega$ using Model P-97 from Sutter Instrument Co. (Novato, CA, USA) and filled with 1\,M KCl solution. The electrodes were controlled using microdrives (Luigs-Neumann; Ratingen, Germany) and the potentials recorded with the bridge mode of the SEC-05 amplifier (npi-electronics GmbH, Tamm, Germany) and lowpass filtered at 10 kHz.
The in vivo intracellular recordings of P-unit electroreceptors were done in the lateral line nerve. The fish were anesthetized with MS-222 (100-130 mg/l; PharmaQ; Fordingbridge, UK) and the part of the skin covering the lateral line just behind the skull was removed, while the area was anesthetized with Lidocaine (2\%; bela-pharm; Vechta, Germany). The fish were immobilized for the recordings with Tubocurarine (Sigma-Aldrich; Steinheim, Germany, 25--50\,$\mu l$ of 5\,mg/ml solution) and placed in the experimental tank (47 $\times$ 42 $\times$ 12\,cm) filled with water from the fish's home tank with a conductivity of about 300$\mu$\,S/cm and the temperature was around 28°C.
All experimental protocols were approved and complied with national and regional laws (files: no. 55.2-1-54-2531-135-09 and Regierungspräsidium Tübingen no. ZP 1/13 and no. ZP 1/16)
For the recordings a standard glass mircoelectrode (borosilicate; 1.5 mm outer diameter; GB150F-8P, Science Products, Hofheim, Germany) was used. They were pulled to a resistance of 50--100\,M$\Omega$ using Model P-97 from Sutter Instrument Co. (Novato, CA, USA) and filled with 1\,M KCl solution. The electrodes were controlled using microdrives (Luigs-Neumann; Ratingen, Germany) and the potentials recorded with the bridge mode of the SEC-05 amplifier (npi-electronics GmbH, Tamm, Germany) and lowpass filtered at 10 kHz.
During the recording spikes were detected online using the peak detection algorithm from \cite{todd1999identification}. It uses a dynamically adjusted threshold value above the previously detected trough. To detect spikes through changes in amplitude the threshold was set to 50\% of the amplitude of a detected spike while keeping the threshold above a minimum set to be higher than the noise level based on a histogram of all peak amplitudes. Trials with bad spike detection were removed from further analysis.
The fish's EOD was recorded using using two vertical carbon rods (11\,cm long, 8\,mm diameter) positioned in front of the head and behind its tail. The signal was amplified 200 to 500 times and band-pass filtered (3 − 1500 Hz passband, DPA2-FX, npi-electronics, Tamm, Germany). The electrodes were placed on iso-potential lines of the stimulus field to reduce the interference of the stimulus in the recording. All signals were digitized using a data acquisition board (PCI-6229; National Instruments, Austin TX, USA) at a sampling rate of 20-100\,kHz (54 cells at 20\,kHz, 20 at 100\,kHz and 1 at 40\,kHz)
The fish's EOD was recorded using two vertical carbon rods (11\,cm long, 8\,mm diameter) positioned in front of the head and behind its tail. The signal was amplified 200 to 500 times and band-pass filtered (3 − 1500 Hz passband, DPA2-FX, npi-electronics, Tamm, Germany). The electrodes were placed on iso-potential lines of the stimulus field to reduce the interference of the stimulus in the recording. All signals were digitized using a data acquisition board (PCI-6229; National Instruments, Austin TX, USA) at a sampling rate of 20--100\,kHz (54 cells at 20\,kHz, 20 at 100\,kHz and 1 at 40\,kHz)
The recording and stimulation was done using the ephys, efield, and efish plugins of the software RELACS (\href{www.relacs.net}{www.relacs.net}). It allowed the online spike and EOD detection, pre-analysis and visualization and ran on a Debian computer.
@@ -171,25 +175,25 @@ The recording and stimulation was done using the ephys, efield, and efish plugin
% image of SAM stimulus
The stimuli used during the recordings were presented from two vertical carbon rods (30 cm long, 8 mm diameter) as stimulus electrodes. They were positioned at either side of the fish parallel to its longitudinal axis. The stimuli were computer generated, attenuated and isolated (Attenuator: ATN-01M, Isolator: ISO-02V, npi-electronics, Tamm, Germany) and then send to the stimulus electrodes.
For this work two types of recordings were made with all cells: baseline recordings and amplitude step recordings for the frequency-Intensity curve (FI-Curve).
For this work two types of recordings were made with all cells: baseline recordings and amplitude step recordings for the frequency-Intensity curve (f-I curve).
The 'stimulus' for the baseline recording is purely the EOD field the fish produces itself with no external stimulus.
The amplitude step stimulus here is a step in EOD amplitude. To be able to cause an amplitude modulation (AM) in the fish's EOD , the EOD was recorded and the multiplied with the modulation (see fig. \ref{fig:stim_examples}). This modified EOD can then be presented at the right phase with the stimulus electrodes, causing constructive interference and adding the used amplitude modulation to the EOD (Fig. \ref{fig:stim_examples}). This stimuli construction as seen in equation \ref{eq:am_generation} works for any AM as long as the EOD of the fish is stable.
The amplitude step stimulus here is a step in EOD amplitude. To be able to cause an amplitude modulation (AM) in the fish's EOD , the EOD was recorded and multiplied with the modulation (see fig. \ref{fig:stim_examples}). This modified EOD can then be presented at the right phase with the stimulus electrodes, causing constructive interference and adding the used amplitude modulation to the EOD (Fig. \ref{fig:stim_examples}). This stimuli construction as seen in equation~\ref{eq:am_generation} works for any AM as long as the EOD of the fish is stable.
\begin{equation}
Stimulus = EOD(t) + AM(t) * EOD(t) \todo{acceptable?}
V_{Stim}(t) = EOD(t)(1 + AM(t))
\label{eq:am_generation}
\end{equation}
\begin{figure}[H]
\floatbox[{\capbeside\thisfloatsetup{capbesideposition={left, center}, capbesidewidth=0.45\textwidth}}]{figure}[\FBwidth]
{\caption{\label{fig:stim_examples} Example of the stimulus construction. At the top a recording of the fish's EOD. In the middle a part of the recording multiplied with the AM, a step with a contrast of 130\% between 0 and 50\,ms (marked in \todo{color}). At the bottom the resulting stimulus trace when the AM is added to the EOD. This example stimulus is for visualization purposes 50\,ms short. During the measurements the stimulus was 0.4\,s or 1\,s long. }}
{\caption{\label{fig:stim_examples} Example of the stimulus construction. At the top a recording of the fish's EOD. In the middle: EOD recording multiplied with the AM, with a step from 0 to a contrast of 30\,\% between 0 and 50\,ms (marked in \todo{color}). At the bottom the resulting stimulus trace when the AM is added to the EOD. \todo{Umformulieren}}}
{\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{figures/amGeneration.pdf}}
\end{figure}
The step stimuli all consisted of a delay of 0.2\,s followed by a 0.4\,s (n=68) or 1\,s (n=7) long step and a 0.8\,s long recovery time. The contrast range measured was for the most cells 80-120\% of EOD amplitude. Some cells were measured in a larger range up to 20-180\%. In the range at least 7 contrasts were measured with at least 7 trials, but again many cells were measured with more contrasts and trials. The additionally measured contrasts were used for the model if they had at least 3 trials.
All step stimuli consisted of a delay of 0.2\,s followed by a 0.4\,s (n=68) or 1\,s (n=7) long step and a 0.8\,s long recovery time. The contrast range measured was for the most cells 80--120\% of EOD amplitude. Some cells were measured in a larger range up to 20--180\%. In the range at least 7 contrasts were measured with at least 7 trials, but again many cells were measured with more contrasts and trials. The additionally measured contrasts were used for the model if they had at least 3 trials.
%That means for every cell the FI-Curve was measured at at least 7 Points each with at least 7 trials. If more contrasts were measured during the recording the additional information was used as long as there were at least 3 trials available.
%All presentations had 0.2\,s delay at the start and then started the stimulus at time 0. The step stimulus was presented for 0.4\,s (7 cells) or 1\,s(68 cells) and followed by 0.8\,s time for the cell to recover back to baseline.
@@ -221,36 +225,35 @@ The step stimuli all consisted of a delay of 0.2\,s followed by a 0.4\,s (n=68)
\subsection{Cell Characteristics}
The cells were characterized by ten parameters: 6 for the baseline and 4 for the fi-curve.
For the baseline the mean frequency was calculated by dividing the number of spikes in the recording by the recording time. Then the set of all interspike intervals (ISI) $T$ of the spikes in the recording further parameter was calculated and the other parameters were calculated from it.
The coefficient of variation (CV) is defined as the standard deviation (STD) of $T$ divided by the mean ISI, see equation \ref{eq:CV} with angled brackets as the averaging operator.
The cells were characterized by ten parameters: 6 for the baseline and 4 for the f-I curve.
For the baseline the mean firing rate was calculated by dividing the number of spikes in the recording by the recording time. Then the set of all interspike intervals (ISI) $T$ was computed and further parameters were calculated from it.
The coefficient of variation
\begin{equation}
CV = \frac{STD(T)}{\langle T \rangle}
\label{eq:CV}
\end{equation}
is defined as the standard deviation (STD) of $T$ divided by the mean ISI, see equation \ref{eq:CV} with angled brackets as the averaging operator.
The vector strength (VS) is a measure of how strong the cell locks to a phase of the EOD. It was calculated as seen in Eq. \ref{eq:VS}, by placing each spike on a unit circle depending on the relative spike time $t_i$ of how much time has passed since the start of the current EOD period in relation to the EOD period length. This set of vectors is then averaged and the absolute value of this average vector describes the VS. If the VS is zero the spikes happen equally in all phases of the EOD while if it is one all spikes happen at the exact same phase of the EOD.
\begin{equation}
p(\omega) = \frac{1}{n} \sum_n e^{iwt_i}
vs = |\frac{1}{n} \sum_n e^{iwt_i}|
\label{eq:VS}
\end{equation}
The serial correlation with lag x ($SC_x$) of $T$ is a measure how the ISI $T_i$ (the i-th ISI) influences the $T_{i+x}$ the ISI with a lag of x intervals. This is calculated as,
The serial correlation with lag k ($SC_k$) of $T$ is a measure how the ISI $T_i$ (the $i$-th ISI) influences the $T_{i+k}$ the ISI with a lag of x intervals. This is calculated as,
\begin{equation}
SC_x = \frac{\langle (T_{i} - \langle T \rangle)(T_{i+x} - \langle T \rangle) \rangle}{\sqrt{\langle (T_i - \langle T \rangle)^2 \rangle}\sqrt{\langle (T_{i+x} - \langle T \rangle)^2 \rangle}}
SC_k = \frac{\langle (T_{i} - \langle T \rangle)(T_{i+k} - \langle T \rangle) \rangle}{\sqrt{\langle (T_i - \langle T \rangle)^2 \rangle}\sqrt{\langle (T_{i+k} - \langle T \rangle)^2 \rangle}}
\label{eq:SC}
\end{equation}
with the angled brackets again the averaging operator.
Finally the ISI-histogram was calculated within a range of 0-50\,ms and a bin size of 0.1\,ms and the burstiness was calculated as the percentage of ISI smaller than 2.5 EOD periods multiplied by the average ISI. This gives a rough measure of how how often a cell fires in the immediately following EOD periods compared to its average firing frequency. With a cell being more bursty the higher the percentage of small ISI and the lower the mean firing frequency of the cell.
Finally the ISI-histogram was calculated within a range of 0--50\,ms and a bin size of 0.1\,ms. The burstiness was calculated as the percentage of ISI smaller than 2.5 EOD periods multiplied by the average ISI. This gives a rough measure of how how often a cell fires in the immediately following EOD periods compared to its average firing frequency. With a cell being more bursty the higher the percentage of small ISI and the lower the mean firing frequency of the cell.
%burstiness: \todo{how to write as equation, ignore and don't show an equation?}
@@ -289,7 +292,7 @@ The next slightly more complex model is the leaky integrate-and-fire (LIF) model
\label{eq:basic_voltage_dynamics}
\end{equation}
To reproduce this behavior the model needs some form of memory of previous spikes. There are two main ways this can be added to the model as an adaptive current or a dynamic threshold. The biophysical mechanism of the adaption in p-units is unknown because the cell bodies are not accessible for intra-cellular recordings. Following the results of \cite{benda2010linear} a negative adaptive current was chosen, because the dynamic threshold causes divisive adaption instead of the subtractive adaption of p-units \todo{reference}. This results in an leaky integrate-and-fire model with adaption current (LIFAC) (fig. \ref{fig:model_comparison} LIFAC). The added adaptive current follow the dynamics:
To reproduce this behavior the model needs some form of memory of previous spikes. There are two main ways this can be added to the model as an adaptive current or a dynamic threshold. The biophysical mechanism of the adaption in p-units is unknown because the cell bodies are not accessible for intra-cellular recordings. Following the results of \cite{benda2010linear} a negative adaptive current was chosen, because the dynamic threshold causes divisive adaption instead of the subtractive adaption of p-units \citep{benda2005spike}. This results in an leaky integrate-and-fire model with adaption current (LIFAC) (fig. \ref{fig:model_comparison} LIFAC). The added adaptive current follow the dynamics:
\begin{equation}
\tau_A \frac{dI_A}{dt} = -I_A + \Delta_A \sum \delta (t)
@@ -305,7 +308,7 @@ It is modeled as an exponential decay with the time constant $\tau_A$ and a stre
The stimulus current $I_{Input}$, the bias current $I_{Bias}$ and the already discussed adaption current $I_A$. Note that in this p-unit model all currents are measured in mV because as mentioned above the cell body is not accessible for intra-cellular recordings and as such the membrane resistance $R_m$ is unknown \todo{ref mem res p-units}. $I_{Input}$ is the current of the stimulus, an amplitude modulated sine wave mimicking the frequency EOD. This stimulus is then rectified to model the receptor synapse and low-pass filtered with a time constant of $\tau_{dend}$ to simulate the low-pass filter properties of the dendrite (fig. \ref{fig:stim_development}). Afterwards it is multiplied with $\alpha$ a cell specific gain factor. This gain factor has the unit of cm because the $I_{Input}$ stimulus represents the EOD with a unit of mV/cm. $I_{Bias}$ is the bias current that causes the cells spontaneous spiking.
Finally noise and an absolute refractory period were added to the model. The noise $\xi$ is drawn in from a Gaussian noise with values between 0 and 1 and divided by $\sqrt{\Delta t}$ to get a noise which autocorrelation function is independent of the simulation step size $\Delta t$. The implemented form of the absolute refractory period $t_{ref}$ keeps the model voltage at zero for the duration of $t_{ref}$ after a spike.
Finally noise and an absolute refractory period were added to the model. The noise $\xi$ is drawn in from a Gaussian noise distribution and divided by $\sqrt{\Delta t}$ to get a noise which autocorrelation function is independent of the simulation step size $\Delta t$. The implemented form of the absolute refractory period $t_{ref}$ keeps the model voltage at zero for the duration of $t_{ref}$ after a spike.
\begin{figure}[H]
@@ -369,7 +372,6 @@ The error of the VS, CV, SC, and burstiness was calculated as the scaled absolut
\begin{equation}
err_i = |x^M_i - x^C_i| * c_i
\end{equation}
with $x^M_i$ the model value for the characteristic $i$, $x^C_i$ the corresponding cell value and $c_i$ a scaling factor that is the same for all cells but different between characteristics. The scaling factor was used to make all errors a similar size.
The error for the slope of the $f_{inf}$ fit was the scaled relative difference: