matlab matrix approach Search Results


90
MathWorks Inc matlab matrix approach
Matlab Matrix Approach, supplied by MathWorks 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/matlab matrix approach/product/MathWorks Inc
Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
matlab matrix approach - by Bioz Stars, 2026-04
90/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier

90
MathWorks Inc svd toolbox
Svd Toolbox, supplied by MathWorks 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/svd toolbox/product/MathWorks Inc
Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
svd toolbox - by Bioz Stars, 2026-04
90/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier

90
MathWorks Inc matrix system
Matrix System, supplied by MathWorks 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/matrix system/product/MathWorks Inc
Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
matrix system - by Bioz Stars, 2026-04
90/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier

90
MathWorks Inc matrix algebra
Matrix Algebra, supplied by MathWorks 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/matrix algebra/product/MathWorks Inc
Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
matrix algebra - by Bioz Stars, 2026-04
90/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier

90
MathWorks Inc regularized convolution matrix approach
(A) ROIs chosen using k-means clustering to correspond approximately to motor, forepaw, hindpaw, and whisker regions (1–4) overlaid on raw GCaMP images from between 11 and 32 DPI (mouse 2). Insets show GCaMP- and HbT-averaged whisker response maps to right tactile whisker stimuli, averaged after exclusion of trials in which the mouse ran (see ). (B) Averaged neural and hemodynamic responses in the ROIs indicated in (A) for each DPI (mouse 2). Note differing amplitude scales for each ROI. Shaded error bounds show SEM. (C) Hemodynamic response function (HRF) deconvolution results for each ROI and DPI (mouse 2). Here, all plots are shown on the same y axis scale, in most cases demonstrating a consistent relationship between %GCaMP signal change and micron ΔHb changes, despite the more variable amplitudes of the raw responses in (B). Notable exceptions are seen in tumor-infiltrated regions, indicated by black arrows. The numbers in color indicate the correlation coefficient between the original data and the HRF <t>convolution</t> fit. (D) Summary metric calculated as the integral of the first 1.8 s of the HRF (relative to t = 0) across days for each mouse (columns) for ROIs in the unaffected whisker regions (inset image, regions a and c). (E) Results for frontal ROIs (regions c and d), with “d” corresponding to the tumor in each case. A progressive trend of increasing [HbR] and decreasing [HbO] within the tumor HRF is seen in all mice (arrows). See and for further results in mice 1 and 3.
Regularized Convolution Matrix Approach, supplied by MathWorks 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/regularized convolution matrix approach/product/MathWorks Inc
Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
regularized convolution matrix approach - by Bioz Stars, 2026-04
90/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier

90
MathWorks Inc matlab 2016b
(A) ROIs chosen using k-means clustering to correspond approximately to motor, forepaw, hindpaw, and whisker regions (1–4) overlaid on raw GCaMP images from between 11 and 32 DPI (mouse 2). Insets show GCaMP- and HbT-averaged whisker response maps to right tactile whisker stimuli, averaged after exclusion of trials in which the mouse ran (see ). (B) Averaged neural and hemodynamic responses in the ROIs indicated in (A) for each DPI (mouse 2). Note differing amplitude scales for each ROI. Shaded error bounds show SEM. (C) Hemodynamic response function (HRF) deconvolution results for each ROI and DPI (mouse 2). Here, all plots are shown on the same y axis scale, in most cases demonstrating a consistent relationship between %GCaMP signal change and micron ΔHb changes, despite the more variable amplitudes of the raw responses in (B). Notable exceptions are seen in tumor-infiltrated regions, indicated by black arrows. The numbers in color indicate the correlation coefficient between the original data and the HRF <t>convolution</t> fit. (D) Summary metric calculated as the integral of the first 1.8 s of the HRF (relative to t = 0) across days for each mouse (columns) for ROIs in the unaffected whisker regions (inset image, regions a and c). (E) Results for frontal ROIs (regions c and d), with “d” corresponding to the tumor in each case. A progressive trend of increasing [HbR] and decreasing [HbO] within the tumor HRF is seen in all mice (arrows). See and for further results in mice 1 and 3.
Matlab 2016b, supplied by MathWorks 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/matlab 2016b/product/MathWorks Inc
Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
matlab 2016b - by Bioz Stars, 2026-04
90/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier

90
MathWorks Inc matlab/simulink
(A) ROIs chosen using k-means clustering to correspond approximately to motor, forepaw, hindpaw, and whisker regions (1–4) overlaid on raw GCaMP images from between 11 and 32 DPI (mouse 2). Insets show GCaMP- and HbT-averaged whisker response maps to right tactile whisker stimuli, averaged after exclusion of trials in which the mouse ran (see ). (B) Averaged neural and hemodynamic responses in the ROIs indicated in (A) for each DPI (mouse 2). Note differing amplitude scales for each ROI. Shaded error bounds show SEM. (C) Hemodynamic response function (HRF) deconvolution results for each ROI and DPI (mouse 2). Here, all plots are shown on the same y axis scale, in most cases demonstrating a consistent relationship between %GCaMP signal change and micron ΔHb changes, despite the more variable amplitudes of the raw responses in (B). Notable exceptions are seen in tumor-infiltrated regions, indicated by black arrows. The numbers in color indicate the correlation coefficient between the original data and the HRF <t>convolution</t> fit. (D) Summary metric calculated as the integral of the first 1.8 s of the HRF (relative to t = 0) across days for each mouse (columns) for ROIs in the unaffected whisker regions (inset image, regions a and c). (E) Results for frontal ROIs (regions c and d), with “d” corresponding to the tumor in each case. A progressive trend of increasing [HbR] and decreasing [HbO] within the tumor HRF is seen in all mice (arrows). See and for further results in mice 1 and 3.
Matlab/Simulink, supplied by MathWorks 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/matlab/simulink/product/MathWorks Inc
Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
matlab/simulink - by Bioz Stars, 2026-04
90/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier

Image Search Results


(A) ROIs chosen using k-means clustering to correspond approximately to motor, forepaw, hindpaw, and whisker regions (1–4) overlaid on raw GCaMP images from between 11 and 32 DPI (mouse 2). Insets show GCaMP- and HbT-averaged whisker response maps to right tactile whisker stimuli, averaged after exclusion of trials in which the mouse ran (see ). (B) Averaged neural and hemodynamic responses in the ROIs indicated in (A) for each DPI (mouse 2). Note differing amplitude scales for each ROI. Shaded error bounds show SEM. (C) Hemodynamic response function (HRF) deconvolution results for each ROI and DPI (mouse 2). Here, all plots are shown on the same y axis scale, in most cases demonstrating a consistent relationship between %GCaMP signal change and micron ΔHb changes, despite the more variable amplitudes of the raw responses in (B). Notable exceptions are seen in tumor-infiltrated regions, indicated by black arrows. The numbers in color indicate the correlation coefficient between the original data and the HRF convolution fit. (D) Summary metric calculated as the integral of the first 1.8 s of the HRF (relative to t = 0) across days for each mouse (columns) for ROIs in the unaffected whisker regions (inset image, regions a and c). (E) Results for frontal ROIs (regions c and d), with “d” corresponding to the tumor in each case. A progressive trend of increasing [HbR] and decreasing [HbO] within the tumor HRF is seen in all mice (arrows). See and for further results in mice 1 and 3.

Journal: Cell reports

Article Title: Glioma-Induced Alterations in Neuronal Activity and Neurovascular Coupling during Disease Progression

doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2020.03.064

Figure Lengend Snippet: (A) ROIs chosen using k-means clustering to correspond approximately to motor, forepaw, hindpaw, and whisker regions (1–4) overlaid on raw GCaMP images from between 11 and 32 DPI (mouse 2). Insets show GCaMP- and HbT-averaged whisker response maps to right tactile whisker stimuli, averaged after exclusion of trials in which the mouse ran (see ). (B) Averaged neural and hemodynamic responses in the ROIs indicated in (A) for each DPI (mouse 2). Note differing amplitude scales for each ROI. Shaded error bounds show SEM. (C) Hemodynamic response function (HRF) deconvolution results for each ROI and DPI (mouse 2). Here, all plots are shown on the same y axis scale, in most cases demonstrating a consistent relationship between %GCaMP signal change and micron ΔHb changes, despite the more variable amplitudes of the raw responses in (B). Notable exceptions are seen in tumor-infiltrated regions, indicated by black arrows. The numbers in color indicate the correlation coefficient between the original data and the HRF convolution fit. (D) Summary metric calculated as the integral of the first 1.8 s of the HRF (relative to t = 0) across days for each mouse (columns) for ROIs in the unaffected whisker regions (inset image, regions a and c). (E) Results for frontal ROIs (regions c and d), with “d” corresponding to the tumor in each case. A progressive trend of increasing [HbR] and decreasing [HbO] within the tumor HRF is seen in all mice (arrows). See and for further results in mice 1 and 3.

Article Snippet: Deconvolution was performed using a regularized convolution matrix approach in MATLAB ( ).

Techniques: Whisker Assay

(A) Raw fluorescence image marked with ROIs. Bar, 2 mm. (B) Time series of seizure activity for both GCaMP6f and hemodynamics in three regions indicated in (A). Vertical axes are consistent between plots. (C and D) Time series of seizure activity for both GCaMP6f and hemodynamics for non-tumor (i) and tumor (ii) ROIs indicated in (A). Green dashed lines in (Ci) and (Cii) show predicted change in HbT using convolution of the GCaMP signal with HRFs shown in (Di) and (Dii), derived from the four initial interictal events (indicated with asterisks) for the non-tumor and tumor regions, respectively. Vertical axes are scaled differently to show detail. The measured HbT response in non-tumor regions (black arrow) is significantly lower than predicted by the intense neural seizure activity, suggesting saturation of the hemodynamic response. In the tumor region, the predicted impaired HbT is similar to the measured HbT response (purple arrow), suggesting that the response seen results from active tumor-evoked constriction of vessels within the tumor.

Journal: Cell reports

Article Title: Glioma-Induced Alterations in Neuronal Activity and Neurovascular Coupling during Disease Progression

doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2020.03.064

Figure Lengend Snippet: (A) Raw fluorescence image marked with ROIs. Bar, 2 mm. (B) Time series of seizure activity for both GCaMP6f and hemodynamics in three regions indicated in (A). Vertical axes are consistent between plots. (C and D) Time series of seizure activity for both GCaMP6f and hemodynamics for non-tumor (i) and tumor (ii) ROIs indicated in (A). Green dashed lines in (Ci) and (Cii) show predicted change in HbT using convolution of the GCaMP signal with HRFs shown in (Di) and (Dii), derived from the four initial interictal events (indicated with asterisks) for the non-tumor and tumor regions, respectively. Vertical axes are scaled differently to show detail. The measured HbT response in non-tumor regions (black arrow) is significantly lower than predicted by the intense neural seizure activity, suggesting saturation of the hemodynamic response. In the tumor region, the predicted impaired HbT is similar to the measured HbT response (purple arrow), suggesting that the response seen results from active tumor-evoked constriction of vessels within the tumor.

Article Snippet: Deconvolution was performed using a regularized convolution matrix approach in MATLAB ( ).

Techniques: Fluorescence, Activity Assay, Derivative Assay

Journal: Cell reports

Article Title: Glioma-Induced Alterations in Neuronal Activity and Neurovascular Coupling during Disease Progression

doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2020.03.064

Figure Lengend Snippet:

Article Snippet: Deconvolution was performed using a regularized convolution matrix approach in MATLAB ( ).

Techniques: Recombinant, Software, Modification