title: Generalized Laminar Population Analysis (gLPA) for Interpretation of Multielectrode Data from Cortex.
abstract: Laminar population analysis (LPA) is a method for analysis of electrical data recorded by linear multielectrodes passing through all lamina of cortex. Like principal components analysis (PCA) and independent components analysis (ICA), LPA offers a way to decompose the data into contributions from separate cortical populations. However, instead of using purely mathematical assumptions in the decomposition, LPA is based on physiological constraints, i.e., that the observed LFP (low-frequency part of signal) is driven by action-potential firing as observed in the MUA (multi-unit activity; high-frequency part of the signal). In the presently developed generalized laminar population analysis (gLPA) the set of basis functions accounting for the LFP data is extended compared to the original LPA, thus allowing for a better fit of the model to experimental data. This enhances the risk for overfitting, however, and we therefore tested various versions of gLPA on virtual LFP data in which we knew the ground truth. These synthetic data were generated by biophysical forward-modeling of electrical signals from network activity in the comprehensive, and well-known, thalamocortical network model developed by Traub and coworkers. The results for the Traub model imply that while the laminar components extracted by the original LPA method overall are in fair agreement with the ground-truth laminar components, the results may be improved by use of gLPA method with two (gLPA-2) or even three (gLPA-3) postsynaptic LFP kernels per laminar population.
authors.affiliation: Laboratory of Neuroinformatics, Department of Neurophysiology, Nencki Institute of Experimental Biology of the Polish Academy of Sciences Warsaw, Poland.
authors.forename: Helena T
authors.initials: HT
authors.lastname: Głąbska
authors.affiliation: Department of Mathematical Sciences and Technology, Norwegian University of Life Sciences Aas, Norway.
authors.forename: Eivind
authors.initials: E
authors.lastname: Norheim
authors.affiliation: Departments of Neurosciences and Radiology, University of CaliforniaSan Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA; Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Harvard Medical School, Massachusetts General HospitalCharlestown, MA, USA.
authors.forename: Anna
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Devor
authors.affiliation: Departments of Neurosciences and Radiology, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA.
authors.forename: Anders M
authors.initials: AM
authors.lastname: Dale
authors.affiliation: Department of Mathematical Sciences and Technology, Norwegian University of Life SciencesAas, Norway; Department of Physics, University of OsloOslo, Norway.
authors.forename: Gaute T
authors.initials: GT
authors.lastname: Einevoll
authors.affiliation: Laboratory of Neuroinformatics, Department of Neurophysiology, Nencki Institute of Experimental Biology of the Polish Academy of Sciences Warsaw, Poland.
authors.forename: Daniel K
authors.initials: DK
authors.lastname: Wójcik
keywords: LFP analysis; MUA; computational neuroscience; local field potential (LFP); model-based analysis; multi-unit activity; signal decomposition; thalamocortical
references.citation: Front Neuroinform. 2014 Jan 16;7:41
references.pmid: 24474916
references.citation: J Neurosci. 2012 Aug 22;32(34):11798-811
references.pmid: 22915121
references.citation: Neuroinformatics. 2011 Dec;9(4):401-25
references.pmid: 21409556
references.citation: J Comput Neurosci. 1999 Mar-Apr;6(2):169-84
references.pmid: 10333161
references.citation: J Neurosci Methods. 2006 Jun 30;154(1-2):116-33
references.pmid: 16436298
references.citation: J Neurosci Methods. 2015 Apr 30;245:182-204
references.pmid: 25662445
references.citation: Physiol Rev. 1985 Jan;65(1):37-100
references.pmid: 3880898
references.citation: Neuroinformatics. 2015 Oct;13(4):403-26
references.pmid: 25822810
references.citation: J Comput Neurosci. 2010 Dec;29(3):459-73
references.pmid: 20033271
references.citation: J Neurophysiol. 2007 Mar;97(3):2174-90
references.pmid: 17182911
references.citation: J Neurosci. 1988 Nov;8(11):4007-26
references.pmid: 3183710
references.citation: Neuroimage. 2003 Nov;20(3):1743-55
references.pmid: 14642484
references.citation: J Neurophysiol. 1975 Mar;38(2):356-68
references.pmid: 805215
references.citation: J Comput Neurosci. 2010 Dec;29(3):423-44
references.pmid: 20502952
references.citation: J Neurophysiol. 1968 Nov;31(6):884-915
references.pmid: 5710539
references.citation: Nat Rev Neurosci. 2013 Nov;14 (11):770-85
references.pmid: 24135696
references.citation: Biophys J. 2008 Feb 1;94(3):784-802
references.pmid: 17921225
references.citation: J Neurosci Methods. 2001 Mar 30;106(1):69-79
references.pmid: 11248342
references.citation: J Comput Neurosci. 2010 Dec;29(3):445-57
references.pmid: 20094907
references.citation: J Comput Neurosci. 2008 Jun;24(3):291-313
references.pmid: 17926125
references.citation: Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2012 Feb;22(1):11-7
references.pmid: 22023727
references.citation: Nat Neurosci. 2004 May;7(5):446-51
references.pmid: 15114356
references.citation: Neural Comput. 2012 Feb;24(2):541-75
references.pmid: 22091662
references.citation: PLoS One. 2011;6(8):e22790
references.pmid: 21829652
references.citation: PLoS One. 2014 Aug 25;9(8):e105071
references.pmid: 25153730
references.citation: Neural Comput. 1997 Aug 15;9(6):1179-209
references.pmid: 9248061
references.citation: Nat Rev Neurosci. 2012 May 18;13(6):407-20
references.pmid: 22595786
references.citation: J Neurophysiol. 2005 Apr;93(4):2194-232
references.pmid: 15525801
references.citation: J Neurophysiol. 1991 Apr;65(4):891-8
references.pmid: 2051209