2009
DOI: 10.1109/tbme.2009.2027604
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Bayesian Clustering Method for Tracking Neural Signals Over Successive Intervals

Abstract: Abstract-This paper introduces a new, unsupervised method for sorting and tracking the action potentials of individual neurons in multiunit extracellular recordings. Presuming the data are divided into short, sequential recording intervals, the core of our strategy relies upon an extension of a traditional mixture model approach that incorporates clustering results from the preceding interval in a Bayesian manner, while still allowing for signal nonstationarity and changing numbers of recorded neurons. As a na… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Because of this, correlations in waveform shape (or a difference-of-waveform norm) could not be used as the sole indicator of cluster identity. Consequently, although automated tracking of clusters across discrete recording positions would have considerably improved the efficacy of our dipole localization procedure, existing automated cluster linking methods (Emondi et al 2004;Wolf and Burdick 2009) would not have sufficed. Additionally, the candidate set of clusters to be linked had to pass a test concerning the noise covariance; the noise covariance (across the 4 channels) had to be similar at each tetrode position.…”
Section: Spike Preprocessingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Because of this, correlations in waveform shape (or a difference-of-waveform norm) could not be used as the sole indicator of cluster identity. Consequently, although automated tracking of clusters across discrete recording positions would have considerably improved the efficacy of our dipole localization procedure, existing automated cluster linking methods (Emondi et al 2004;Wolf and Burdick 2009) would not have sufficed. Additionally, the candidate set of clusters to be linked had to pass a test concerning the noise covariance; the noise covariance (across the 4 channels) had to be similar at each tetrode position.…”
Section: Spike Preprocessingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[12-15]). Nevertheless, such analytical processes largely relate peak identification to their regular frequency.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A common approach is to break the recording into chunks, perform spike sorting on each chunk independently, and finally link the clusters across time (Bar-Hillel et al, 2006; Tolias et al, 2007; Wolf & Burdick, 2009; Shalchyan & Farina, 2014; Dhawale et al, 2015). …”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%