4.8 Article

Accurate Estimation of Neural Population Dynamics without Spike Sorting

期刊

NEURON
卷 103, 期 2, 页码 292-+

出版社

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuron.2019.05.003

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIH NRSA grant [1F31NS089376-01]
  2. Stanford Graduate Fellowship
  3. NSF GRFP
  4. NSF IGERT grant [0734683, 1F31NS103409-01]
  5. NSF Graduate Research Fellowship
  6. Ric Weiland Stanford Graduate Fellowship
  7. Christopher and Dana Reeve Foundation
  8. Burroughs Wellcome Fund Career Awards in the Biomedical Sciences
  9. DARPA BTO REPAIR'' grant [N66001-10-C-2010]
  10. NeuroFAST'' award [W911NF-14-2-0013]
  11. NIH NINDS grant [T-R01NS076460]
  12. NIH NIMH grant [T-R01MH09964703]
  13. NIH Director's Pioneer Award [8DP1HD075623]
  14. Simons Foundation Collaboration on the Global Brain [325380, 543045]
  15. Howard Hughes Medical Institute
  16. Burroughs Wellcome foundation
  17. Sloan foundation
  18. Simons foundation
  19. McKnight foundation
  20. James S. McDonell foundation
  21. Office of Naval Research

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A central goal of systems neuroscience is to relate an organism's neural activity to behavior. Neural population analyses often reduce the data dimensionality to focus on relevant activity patterns. A major hurdle to data analysis is spike sorting, and this problem is growing as the number of recorded neurons increases. Here, we investigate whether spike sorting is necessary to estimate neural population dynamics. The theory of random projections suggests that we can accurately estimate the geometry of low-dimensional manifolds from a small number of linear projections of the data. We recorded data using Neuropixels probes in motor cortex of nonhuman primates and reanalyzed data from three previous studies and found that neural dynamics and scientific conclusions are quite similar using multiunit threshold crossings rather than sorted neurons. This finding unlocks existing data for new analyses and informs the design and use of new electrode arrays for laboratory and clinical use.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据