A Simulation Study on the Encoding Mechanism of Retinal Ganglion Cell

Understanding how the retina encodes visual information is a key issue for the development of a retinal prosthesis. To study this issue, the neural retina is modeled as a retina module (RM) consisted of an ensemble of spatial-temporal (ST) filters and each ST filter simulates the input-output property of an individual ganglion cell (GC). Two receptive field (RF) models of retinal GC, the difference of Gaussians (DOG) model and the disinhibition (DIS) model, are employed to implement these ST filters respectively. RM performs the encoding operation from an input optical pattern to a group of parallel action potential (AP) trains. To assess the encoding efficiency of RF models, a central visual system module (VM) consisted of a group of artificial neural networks is employed to perform the decoding operation from AP trains to an output perceptual pattern. A matching error is defined as an index to quantify the similarity between the input optical pattern and the output perceptual pattern generated by VM. The simulation results suggest that the matching error declines dramatically when the DOG model is replaced by the DIS model, which implies that the encoding mechanism of the DIS model might be more effective than that of the DOG model.

[1]  H Ikeda,et al.  The outer disinhibitory surround of the retinal ganglion cell receptive field , 1972, The Journal of physiology.

[2]  Rolf Eckmiller,et al.  Tunable retina encoders for retina implants: why and how , 2005, Journal of neural engineering.

[3]  Michael J. Berry,et al.  The Neural Code of the Retina , 1999, Neuron.

[4]  J. Troy,et al.  The receptive fields of cat retinal ganglion cells in physiological and pathological states: where we are after half a century of research , 2002, Progress in Retinal and Eye Research.

[5]  James Theiler,et al.  Correlated Firing Improves Stimulus Discrimination in a Retinal Model , 2004, Neural Computation.

[6]  David J. Fleet,et al.  Spatiotemporal inseparability in early visual processing , 1985, Biological Cybernetics.

[7]  Rolf Eckmiller,et al.  Psychophysical test of a tunable retina encoder for retina implants , 1999, IJCNN'99. International Joint Conference on Neural Networks. Proceedings (Cat. No.99CH36339).

[8]  Michael J. Berry,et al.  Refractoriness and Neural Precision , 1997, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[9]  Kwabena Boahen,et al.  A silicon retina that reproduces signals in the optic nerve , 2006, Journal of neural engineering.

[10]  E. Zrenner Will Retinal Implants Restore Vision ? , 2002 .

[11]  H. Gerding,et al.  A new approach towards a minimal invasive retina implant , 2007, Journal of neural engineering.

[12]  Hai-Qing Gong,et al.  Luminance adaptation increased the contrast sensitivity of retinal ganglion cells , 2005, Neuroreport.

[13]  L. Croner,et al.  Receptive fields of P and M ganglion cells across the primate retina , 1995, Vision Research.

[14]  Rolf Eckmiller,et al.  Exploration of a dialog-based tunable retina encoder for retina implants , 1999, Neurocomputing.

[15]  Nicolas P Cottaris,et al.  How the retinal network reacts to epiretinal stimulation to form the prosthetic visual input to the cortex , 2005, Journal of neural engineering.