Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2010 Aug 24.
Published in final edited form as: J Neurophysiol. 2005 Sep 7;95(1):379–400. doi: 10.1152/jn.00498.2005

FIG. 2.

FIG. 2

Relationship of scaling of the TDH stimuli to the classical receptive field (RF) size. Left: diameter D of the classical RF for the target unit (diagrammed as unit 1) is taken to be the smallest inner diameter of an annulus that did not produce a measurable response (bottom left); other units (diagrammed as unit 2) might lead to a somewhat different choice of D and units might show increasing responses to patches of diameter >D (top). See METHODS for additional details. Parameter σ that defines the spatial spread of the TDH stimuli (see Eqs. A1, A2, A4, and A5) is then chosen as σ = D/10, which produces spatial profiles that are confined to a disk of radius D for low ranks, but extend beyond it for high ranks (right). h0 indicates the radial dependency of the TDH stimulus of rank 0 (common to Cartesian and polar separations); h7 indicates the dependency of the rank-7 Cartesian TDH C0,7 along its long axis.