codes with two-dimensional gaussian fitting algorithm Search Results


two-dimensional gaussian random fields  (MediaLab Inc)
90
MediaLab Inc two-dimensional gaussian random fields
Two Dimensional Gaussian Random Fields, supplied by MediaLab Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/result/two-dimensional gaussian random fields/product/MediaLab Inc
Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
two-dimensional gaussian random fields - by Bioz Stars, 2026-05
90/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier
two-dimensional gaussian fit  (GraphPad Software Inc)
90
GraphPad Software Inc two-dimensional gaussian fit
Spatial receptive fields in the rd1 Opn1mwR dorsal lateral geniculate nucleus (dLGN) A and B: effective photon flux (mean ± SE) of the background and bar stimuli used for receptive field mapping in the Opn1mwR and rd1 Opn1mwR mice, respectively, with calculated Michaelson contrast (%, mean ± SE) for each photopigment. Note that rod contrast is not relevant for rd1 mice because these animals lack rods at the age of recording. C: heat map for representative single units from the dLGN of an Opn1mwR (top) and rd1 Opn1mwR (bottom) mouse showing change in firing rate (spikes/s; scale at right) in response to the appearance of vertical bars (250 ms starting at time 0; 13° width at 4.5° resolution) as a function of location on azimuth of bar center. D: peak response amplitude (change in firing rate, mean ± SE) as a function of bar position for the 2 units in C, fit with a <t>Gaussian</t> function. E: box-and-whisker plot showing that receptive field diameter (mean ± SE) for all light-responsive units was significantly larger in Opn1mwR (12.17 ± 0.5°; n = 38 units; green bar) than in rd1 Opn1mwR mice (9.96 ± 0.3°; n = 48 units; black bar; ***P = 0.0005, unpaired t test). Box shows interquartile range; line in box is the median; cross is the mean; and whiskers indicate minimum to maximum range. F: peak response amplitude (change in firing rate, mean ± SE) was significantly larger in Opn1mwR (10.1 ± 1.2 spikes/s) than in rd1 Opn1mwR mice (7.02 ± 0.8 spikes/s; *P = 0.03, unpaired t test). G: response latency (mean ± SE) was significantly increased in rd1 Opn1mwR (177.9 ± 5.4 ms) compared with Opn1mwR mice (112.3 ± 4.46 ms; ****P < 0.0001, unpaired t test).
Two Dimensional Gaussian Fit, supplied by GraphPad Software Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/result/two-dimensional gaussian fit/product/GraphPad Software Inc
Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
two-dimensional gaussian fit - by Bioz Stars, 2026-05
90/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier
2d gaussian function  (Nikon)
99
Nikon 2d gaussian function
Spatial receptive fields in the rd1 Opn1mwR dorsal lateral geniculate nucleus (dLGN) A and B: effective photon flux (mean ± SE) of the background and bar stimuli used for receptive field mapping in the Opn1mwR and rd1 Opn1mwR mice, respectively, with calculated Michaelson contrast (%, mean ± SE) for each photopigment. Note that rod contrast is not relevant for rd1 mice because these animals lack rods at the age of recording. C: heat map for representative single units from the dLGN of an Opn1mwR (top) and rd1 Opn1mwR (bottom) mouse showing change in firing rate (spikes/s; scale at right) in response to the appearance of vertical bars (250 ms starting at time 0; 13° width at 4.5° resolution) as a function of location on azimuth of bar center. D: peak response amplitude (change in firing rate, mean ± SE) as a function of bar position for the 2 units in C, fit with a <t>Gaussian</t> function. E: box-and-whisker plot showing that receptive field diameter (mean ± SE) for all light-responsive units was significantly larger in Opn1mwR (12.17 ± 0.5°; n = 38 units; green bar) than in rd1 Opn1mwR mice (9.96 ± 0.3°; n = 48 units; black bar; ***P = 0.0005, unpaired t test). Box shows interquartile range; line in box is the median; cross is the mean; and whiskers indicate minimum to maximum range. F: peak response amplitude (change in firing rate, mean ± SE) was significantly larger in Opn1mwR (10.1 ± 1.2 spikes/s) than in rd1 Opn1mwR mice (7.02 ± 0.8 spikes/s; *P = 0.03, unpaired t test). G: response latency (mean ± SE) was significantly increased in rd1 Opn1mwR (177.9 ± 5.4 ms) compared with Opn1mwR mice (112.3 ± 4.46 ms; ****P < 0.0001, unpaired t test).
2d Gaussian Function, supplied by Nikon, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 99/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/result/2d gaussian function/product/Nikon
Average 99 stars, based on 1 article reviews
2d gaussian function - by Bioz Stars, 2026-05
99/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier
variant twodimensional gaussian function  (Federation of European Neuroscience Societies)
90
Federation of European Neuroscience Societies variant twodimensional gaussian function
Spatial receptive fields in the rd1 Opn1mwR dorsal lateral geniculate nucleus (dLGN) A and B: effective photon flux (mean ± SE) of the background and bar stimuli used for receptive field mapping in the Opn1mwR and rd1 Opn1mwR mice, respectively, with calculated Michaelson contrast (%, mean ± SE) for each photopigment. Note that rod contrast is not relevant for rd1 mice because these animals lack rods at the age of recording. C: heat map for representative single units from the dLGN of an Opn1mwR (top) and rd1 Opn1mwR (bottom) mouse showing change in firing rate (spikes/s; scale at right) in response to the appearance of vertical bars (250 ms starting at time 0; 13° width at 4.5° resolution) as a function of location on azimuth of bar center. D: peak response amplitude (change in firing rate, mean ± SE) as a function of bar position for the 2 units in C, fit with a <t>Gaussian</t> function. E: box-and-whisker plot showing that receptive field diameter (mean ± SE) for all light-responsive units was significantly larger in Opn1mwR (12.17 ± 0.5°; n = 38 units; green bar) than in rd1 Opn1mwR mice (9.96 ± 0.3°; n = 48 units; black bar; ***P = 0.0005, unpaired t test). Box shows interquartile range; line in box is the median; cross is the mean; and whiskers indicate minimum to maximum range. F: peak response amplitude (change in firing rate, mean ± SE) was significantly larger in Opn1mwR (10.1 ± 1.2 spikes/s) than in rd1 Opn1mwR mice (7.02 ± 0.8 spikes/s; *P = 0.03, unpaired t test). G: response latency (mean ± SE) was significantly increased in rd1 Opn1mwR (177.9 ± 5.4 ms) compared with Opn1mwR mice (112.3 ± 4.46 ms; ****P < 0.0001, unpaired t test).
Variant Twodimensional Gaussian Function, supplied by Federation of European Neuroscience Societies, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/result/variant twodimensional gaussian function/product/Federation of European Neuroscience Societies
Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
variant twodimensional gaussian function - by Bioz Stars, 2026-05
90/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier
iterative nearest-neighbor averaging procedure  (Federation of European Neuroscience Societies)
90
Federation of European Neuroscience Societies iterative nearest-neighbor averaging procedure
Spatial receptive fields in the rd1 Opn1mwR dorsal lateral geniculate nucleus (dLGN) A and B: effective photon flux (mean ± SE) of the background and bar stimuli used for receptive field mapping in the Opn1mwR and rd1 Opn1mwR mice, respectively, with calculated Michaelson contrast (%, mean ± SE) for each photopigment. Note that rod contrast is not relevant for rd1 mice because these animals lack rods at the age of recording. C: heat map for representative single units from the dLGN of an Opn1mwR (top) and rd1 Opn1mwR (bottom) mouse showing change in firing rate (spikes/s; scale at right) in response to the appearance of vertical bars (250 ms starting at time 0; 13° width at 4.5° resolution) as a function of location on azimuth of bar center. D: peak response amplitude (change in firing rate, mean ± SE) as a function of bar position for the 2 units in C, fit with a <t>Gaussian</t> function. E: box-and-whisker plot showing that receptive field diameter (mean ± SE) for all light-responsive units was significantly larger in Opn1mwR (12.17 ± 0.5°; n = 38 units; green bar) than in rd1 Opn1mwR mice (9.96 ± 0.3°; n = 48 units; black bar; ***P = 0.0005, unpaired t test). Box shows interquartile range; line in box is the median; cross is the mean; and whiskers indicate minimum to maximum range. F: peak response amplitude (change in firing rate, mean ± SE) was significantly larger in Opn1mwR (10.1 ± 1.2 spikes/s) than in rd1 Opn1mwR mice (7.02 ± 0.8 spikes/s; *P = 0.03, unpaired t test). G: response latency (mean ± SE) was significantly increased in rd1 Opn1mwR (177.9 ± 5.4 ms) compared with Opn1mwR mice (112.3 ± 4.46 ms; ****P < 0.0001, unpaired t test).
Iterative Nearest Neighbor Averaging Procedure, supplied by Federation of European Neuroscience Societies, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/result/iterative nearest-neighbor averaging procedure/product/Federation of European Neuroscience Societies
Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
iterative nearest-neighbor averaging procedure - by Bioz Stars, 2026-05
90/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier
two-dimensional gaussian function  (Federation of European Neuroscience Societies)
90
Federation of European Neuroscience Societies two-dimensional gaussian function
Spatial receptive fields in the rd1 Opn1mwR dorsal lateral geniculate nucleus (dLGN) A and B: effective photon flux (mean ± SE) of the background and bar stimuli used for receptive field mapping in the Opn1mwR and rd1 Opn1mwR mice, respectively, with calculated Michaelson contrast (%, mean ± SE) for each photopigment. Note that rod contrast is not relevant for rd1 mice because these animals lack rods at the age of recording. C: heat map for representative single units from the dLGN of an Opn1mwR (top) and rd1 Opn1mwR (bottom) mouse showing change in firing rate (spikes/s; scale at right) in response to the appearance of vertical bars (250 ms starting at time 0; 13° width at 4.5° resolution) as a function of location on azimuth of bar center. D: peak response amplitude (change in firing rate, mean ± SE) as a function of bar position for the 2 units in C, fit with a <t>Gaussian</t> function. E: box-and-whisker plot showing that receptive field diameter (mean ± SE) for all light-responsive units was significantly larger in Opn1mwR (12.17 ± 0.5°; n = 38 units; green bar) than in rd1 Opn1mwR mice (9.96 ± 0.3°; n = 48 units; black bar; ***P = 0.0005, unpaired t test). Box shows interquartile range; line in box is the median; cross is the mean; and whiskers indicate minimum to maximum range. F: peak response amplitude (change in firing rate, mean ± SE) was significantly larger in Opn1mwR (10.1 ± 1.2 spikes/s) than in rd1 Opn1mwR mice (7.02 ± 0.8 spikes/s; *P = 0.03, unpaired t test). G: response latency (mean ± SE) was significantly increased in rd1 Opn1mwR (177.9 ± 5.4 ms) compared with Opn1mwR mice (112.3 ± 4.46 ms; ****P < 0.0001, unpaired t test).
Two Dimensional Gaussian Function, supplied by Federation of European Neuroscience Societies, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/result/two-dimensional gaussian function/product/Federation of European Neuroscience Societies
Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
two-dimensional gaussian function - by Bioz Stars, 2026-05
90/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier
two-dimensional gaussian formula  (National Institute of Standards and Technology)
90
National Institute of Standards and Technology two-dimensional gaussian formula
Spatial receptive fields in the rd1 Opn1mwR dorsal lateral geniculate nucleus (dLGN) A and B: effective photon flux (mean ± SE) of the background and bar stimuli used for receptive field mapping in the Opn1mwR and rd1 Opn1mwR mice, respectively, with calculated Michaelson contrast (%, mean ± SE) for each photopigment. Note that rod contrast is not relevant for rd1 mice because these animals lack rods at the age of recording. C: heat map for representative single units from the dLGN of an Opn1mwR (top) and rd1 Opn1mwR (bottom) mouse showing change in firing rate (spikes/s; scale at right) in response to the appearance of vertical bars (250 ms starting at time 0; 13° width at 4.5° resolution) as a function of location on azimuth of bar center. D: peak response amplitude (change in firing rate, mean ± SE) as a function of bar position for the 2 units in C, fit with a <t>Gaussian</t> function. E: box-and-whisker plot showing that receptive field diameter (mean ± SE) for all light-responsive units was significantly larger in Opn1mwR (12.17 ± 0.5°; n = 38 units; green bar) than in rd1 Opn1mwR mice (9.96 ± 0.3°; n = 48 units; black bar; ***P = 0.0005, unpaired t test). Box shows interquartile range; line in box is the median; cross is the mean; and whiskers indicate minimum to maximum range. F: peak response amplitude (change in firing rate, mean ± SE) was significantly larger in Opn1mwR (10.1 ± 1.2 spikes/s) than in rd1 Opn1mwR mice (7.02 ± 0.8 spikes/s; *P = 0.03, unpaired t test). G: response latency (mean ± SE) was significantly increased in rd1 Opn1mwR (177.9 ± 5.4 ms) compared with Opn1mwR mice (112.3 ± 4.46 ms; ****P < 0.0001, unpaired t test).
Two Dimensional Gaussian Formula, supplied by National Institute of Standards and Technology, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/result/two-dimensional gaussian formula/product/National Institute of Standards and Technology
Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
two-dimensional gaussian formula - by Bioz Stars, 2026-05
90/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier

Image Search Results


Spatial receptive fields in the rd1 Opn1mwR dorsal lateral geniculate nucleus (dLGN) A and B: effective photon flux (mean ± SE) of the background and bar stimuli used for receptive field mapping in the Opn1mwR and rd1 Opn1mwR mice, respectively, with calculated Michaelson contrast (%, mean ± SE) for each photopigment. Note that rod contrast is not relevant for rd1 mice because these animals lack rods at the age of recording. C: heat map for representative single units from the dLGN of an Opn1mwR (top) and rd1 Opn1mwR (bottom) mouse showing change in firing rate (spikes/s; scale at right) in response to the appearance of vertical bars (250 ms starting at time 0; 13° width at 4.5° resolution) as a function of location on azimuth of bar center. D: peak response amplitude (change in firing rate, mean ± SE) as a function of bar position for the 2 units in C, fit with a Gaussian function. E: box-and-whisker plot showing that receptive field diameter (mean ± SE) for all light-responsive units was significantly larger in Opn1mwR (12.17 ± 0.5°; n = 38 units; green bar) than in rd1 Opn1mwR mice (9.96 ± 0.3°; n = 48 units; black bar; ***P = 0.0005, unpaired t test). Box shows interquartile range; line in box is the median; cross is the mean; and whiskers indicate minimum to maximum range. F: peak response amplitude (change in firing rate, mean ± SE) was significantly larger in Opn1mwR (10.1 ± 1.2 spikes/s) than in rd1 Opn1mwR mice (7.02 ± 0.8 spikes/s; *P = 0.03, unpaired t test). G: response latency (mean ± SE) was significantly increased in rd1 Opn1mwR (177.9 ± 5.4 ms) compared with Opn1mwR mice (112.3 ± 4.46 ms; ****P < 0.0001, unpaired t test).

Journal: Journal of Neurophysiology

Article Title: Visual responses in the dorsal lateral geniculate nucleus at early stages of retinal degeneration in rd 1 PDE6β mice

doi: 10.1152/jn.00231.2019

Figure Lengend Snippet: Spatial receptive fields in the rd1 Opn1mwR dorsal lateral geniculate nucleus (dLGN) A and B: effective photon flux (mean ± SE) of the background and bar stimuli used for receptive field mapping in the Opn1mwR and rd1 Opn1mwR mice, respectively, with calculated Michaelson contrast (%, mean ± SE) for each photopigment. Note that rod contrast is not relevant for rd1 mice because these animals lack rods at the age of recording. C: heat map for representative single units from the dLGN of an Opn1mwR (top) and rd1 Opn1mwR (bottom) mouse showing change in firing rate (spikes/s; scale at right) in response to the appearance of vertical bars (250 ms starting at time 0; 13° width at 4.5° resolution) as a function of location on azimuth of bar center. D: peak response amplitude (change in firing rate, mean ± SE) as a function of bar position for the 2 units in C, fit with a Gaussian function. E: box-and-whisker plot showing that receptive field diameter (mean ± SE) for all light-responsive units was significantly larger in Opn1mwR (12.17 ± 0.5°; n = 38 units; green bar) than in rd1 Opn1mwR mice (9.96 ± 0.3°; n = 48 units; black bar; ***P = 0.0005, unpaired t test). Box shows interquartile range; line in box is the median; cross is the mean; and whiskers indicate minimum to maximum range. F: peak response amplitude (change in firing rate, mean ± SE) was significantly larger in Opn1mwR (10.1 ± 1.2 spikes/s) than in rd1 Opn1mwR mice (7.02 ± 0.8 spikes/s; *P = 0.03, unpaired t test). G: response latency (mean ± SE) was significantly increased in rd1 Opn1mwR (177.9 ± 5.4 ms) compared with Opn1mwR mice (112.3 ± 4.46 ms; ****P < 0.0001, unpaired t test).

Article Snippet: The spatial receptive field size for single units meeting this criterion was estimated by fitting a two-dimensional Gaussian fit ( R 2 > 0.7) to the relationship between response amplitude and bar position in GraphPad Prism 7 (GraphPad Software).

Techniques: Whisker Assay