Fig 6. Direction-selective (DS) neurons benefit more from hybrid models.

a. Recorded (gray) and predicted (black, SI; red, hybrid-natural-past; response amplitude scaled with a constant 1.5 for better visualization) responses to noise, RFs, as well as full-field chirp responses and moving bar responses (gray, single trials; black, means) of representative DS and non-DS cells. Note that the RFs were dominated by UV stimulus channel because cells were recorded in ventral retina (see Methods). b. Mean model performance based on test data for SI, hybrid-natural-past and hybrid-natural-future (both w = 0.7; n = 10 random seeds per model; trained with responses of n = 427 GCL cells to 5-Hz noise stimulus; p < 0.0001 for SI vs. hybrid-natural-past, p = 0.9307 for hybrid-natural-past vs. hybrid-natural-future; two-sided permutation test, n = 10, 000 repeats). Note that compared to Fig 5b, these models had a lower predictive performance, as we used a different dataset, with 30% of data for training. c. Difference in mean performance between hybrid-natural-past and SI based on test data for 6 broad functional groups of GCL cells (35 OFF, 59 ON-OFF, 49 fast-ON, 38 slow-ON, and 64 uncertain RGCs, as well as 145 dACs; see Methods and Results; n = 10 random seeds per model). d. Like (b) but for n = 90 DS and n = 300 non-DS cells. e. Cumulative histogram of difference in mean prediction between hybrid-natural-past (w = 0.7) and SI on test data for DS (red) and non-DS cells (black), at one particular seed. Error bars in (b)–(d) represent 2.5 and 97.5 percentiles with bootstrapping.