Fig. 2.

Schematic of the validation steps. A. We first establish the functional equivalence between the model of Jones et al. (2007) and its symmetric variant. Here horizontal arrows of different widths in the left panel denote asymmetric connectivities and delays between mini-columns depicted as rectangles containing Superficial and Deep Pyramidal cells (SP and DP) and Inhibitory Interneurons (II). In the right panel a symmetrisation of the model reveals a setup similar to one considered in mean field (neural mass) models B. We then demonstrate the construct validity of the corresponding mass model in relation to mean field model above. This is achieved by fitting the model to synthetic data obtained from its compartmental homologue. C. Finally, we show how this model can distinguish between superficial and deep responses obtained with laminar probes and consider the concomitant changes in model parameters with and without optogenetic manipulation. We exploit Bayesian model selection and compute the relative log-evidence for plausible (left) and implausible (right) experimental setups, where the probes of laminar sensors are considered in right and reversed locations, see the Results section.