Correlation between MUA and LFP using
different windows to define MUA response and LFP response |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
200
ms on / 300 ms off |
|
|
|
0;100 |
50;100 |
100;150 |
100;200 |
100;300 |
100;400 |
LFP window |
|
0;100 |
0.05 |
0.07 |
0.06 |
0.04 |
0.01 |
0.03 |
|
|
50;100 |
0.07 |
0.07 |
0.05 |
0.04 |
0.02 |
0.02 |
|
|
100;150 |
0.06 |
0.06 |
0.25 |
0.24 |
0.20 |
0.18 |
|
|
100;200 |
0.05 |
0.05 |
0.22 |
0.22 |
0.18 |
0.15 |
|
|
100;300 |
0.06 |
0.07 |
0.17 |
0.17 |
0.10 |
0.06 |
|
|
100;400 |
0.06 |
0.08 |
0.18 |
0.19 |
0.15 |
0.13 |
|
|
MUA window |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average correlation coefficient across all sites with reliable
MUA and LFP responses (n = 23
sites). The correlation coefficients correspond to the Pearson correlation
coefficient between the MUA and LFP responses for the 77 objects. |
The MUA responses and LFP responses were defined by counting
spikes or computing the LFP power in different possible analysis windows;
the bolded entry corresponds to the value reported in the main text. |
|
Here
stimuli were presented for 200 ms and there was a 300 ms interval between
pictures (while the data presented in the main text corresponds to a 100
ms presentation interval with a 100 ms blank in between images) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|