Automatic Spike Sorting Using Tuning Information

Neural Computation

Volumn 21, Issue 9, 2009, Pages 2466-2501

  Ventura, Valérie ^a  

^a CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

MAXIMUM LIKELIHOOD ESTIMATION; MAXIMUM PRINCIPLE; SORTING;

CLUSTERINGS; COVARIATES; CURRENT SPIKES; EXPECTATION MAXIMIZATION; FIRING RATES; MISCLASSIFICATION RATES; SORTING METHOD; SPIKE WAVEFORMS; SPIKE-SORTING; WAVEFORMS;

NEURONS;

ACTION POTENTIAL; ALGORITHM; ANIMAL; ARTICLE; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; INFORMATION PROCESSING; METHODOLOGY; NERVE CELL; NERVE CELL NETWORK; PHYSIOLOGY; SIGNAL PROCESSING;

ACTION POTENTIALS; ALGORITHMS; ANIMALS; AUTOMATIC DATA PROCESSING; MODELS, NEUROLOGICAL; NERVE NET; NEURONS; SIGNAL PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED;

EID: 66449119273     PISSN: 08997667     EISSN: 1530888X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1162/neco.2009.12-07-669     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Akaike, H. (1974). A new look at the statistical model identification. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 19 (6), 716–723.
2. Brown, B. N., Barbieri, R., Ventura, V., Kass, R. E., & Frank, L. M. (2002). The time-rescaling theorem and its applications to neural spike train data analysis. Neural Computation, 14, 325–346.
3. Dempster, A. P., Laird, N. M., & Rubin, D. B. (1977). Maximum likelihood from incomplete data via the EM algorithm (with discussion). J. Royal Statistical Society B, 39(1), 138.
4. Fee, M. S., Mitra, P. P., & Kleinfeld, D. (1996). Variability of extracellular spike waveforms of cortical neurons. J. Neurophysiol, 76, 3823–3833.
5. Figueiredo, M. A. F., & Jain, A. K. (2002). Unsupervised learning of finite mixture models: Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence. IEEE Transactions, 24, 381– 396.
6. Harris, K. D., Henze, D. A., Csicsvari, J., Hirase, H., & Buzsaki, G. (2000). Accuracy of tetrode spike separation as determined by simultaneous intracellular and extracellular measurements. J. Neurophysiol., 84, 401–414.
7. Hastie, T., Tibshirani, R., & Friedman, J. (2001). Elements of statistical learning: Data mining, inference and prediction. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
8. Hathaway, R. J. (1986). Another interpretation of the EM algorithm for mixture distributions. Stat. Prob. Lett., 4, 53–56.
9. Kass, R. E., Ventura, V., & Brown, E. N. (2005). Statistical issues in the analysis of neuronal data. J. Neurophysiology, 94, 8–25.
10. Lewicki, M. S. (1994). Bayesian modeling and classification of neural signals. Neural Computation, 6(5), 1005–1030.
11. Lewicki, M. S. (1998). A review of methods for spike sorting: The detection and classification of neural action potential. Network: Comput. Neural Syst., 9, R53– R78.
12. McLachlan, G. J., & Peel, D. (2000). Finite mixture models. New York: Wiley.
13. Neal, R., & Hinton, G. E. (1998). A view of the EM algorithm that justifies incremental, sparse, and other variants: Learning in graphical models. Norwell, MA: Kluwer.
14. Ohberg, F., Johansson, H., Bergenheim, M., Pedersen, J., & Djupsjobacka, M. (1996). A neural network approach to real-time spike discrimination during simultaneous recording from several multi-unit nerve filaments. J. Neurosci. Methods, 64(2), 181–187.
15. Olson, C. R., Gettner, S. N., Ventura, V., Carta, R., & Kass, R. E. (2000). Neuronal activity in macaque supplementary eye field during planning of saccades in response to pattern and spatial cues. J. Neurophysiol., 84, 1369–1384.
16. Pouzat, C., Delescluse, M., Voit, P., & Diebolt, J. (2004). Improved spike-sorting by modeling firing statistics and burst-dependent spike amplitude attenuation: A Markov chain Monte Carlo approach. J. Neurophysiol., 91(6), 2910–2928.
17. Richardson, S., & Green, P. (1997). On Bayesian analysis of mixtures with unknown number of components. J. Royal Statistical Society B 59, 731–792.
18. Sahani, M. (1999). Latent variable models for neural data analysis. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, California Institute of Technology.
19. Sahani, M., Pezaris, J. S., & Andersen, R. A. (1997). On the separation of signals from neighboring cells in tetrode recordings. In M. S. Kearns, S. Solla, & D. Cohn (Eds.), Advances in neural information processing systems, 11. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
20. Salganicoff, M., Sarna, M., Sax, L., & Gerstein, G. L. (1988). Unsupervised waveform classification for multi-neuron recordings: A real-time, software-based system I: Algorithms and implementation. J. Neurosci. Methods, 25(3), 181–187.
21. Schwartz, G. (1978). Estimating the dimension of a model. Annals of Statistics, 6(2), 461–464.
22. Shoham, S., Fellows, M. R., & Normann, R. A. (2003). Robust, automatic spike sorting using mixtures of multivariate t-distributions. J. Neurosci. Methods, 127, 111–122.
23. Ventura, V. (2008). Spike train decoding without spike sorting. Neural Computation, 20, 923–963.
24. Ventura, V. (2009). Traditional waveform-based spike sorting yields biased rate code estimates. PNAS, 106, 6921–6926.
25. Ventura, V., Carta, R., Kass, R. E., Gettner, S. N., & Olson, C. R. (2002). Statistical analysis of temporal evolution in single-neuron firing rates. Biostatistics, 1, 1–20.
26. Wasserman, L. (2004). All of statistics. New York: Springer.