Downloads provided by UsageCounts
In the early 1960s, Hubel and Wiesel reported the first physiological description of cells in cat primary visual cortex. They distinguished two main cell types: simple cells and complex cells. Based on their distinct response properties, they suggested that the two cell types could represent two consecutive stages in receptive-field construction. Since the 1960s, new experimental and computational evidence provided serious alternatives to this hierarchical model. Parallel models put forward the idea that both simple and complex receptive fields could be built in parallel by direct geniculate inputs. Recurrent models suggested that simple cells and complex cells may not be different cell types after all. To this day, a consensus among hierarchical, parallel, and recurrent models has been difficult to attain; however, the circuitry used by all models is becoming increasingly similar. The authors review theoretical and experimental evidence for each line of models emphasizing their strengths and weaknesses.
Models, Neurological, Animals, Humans, Visual Fields, Visual Cortex
Models, Neurological, Animals, Humans, Visual Fields, Visual Cortex
| citations This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 68 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
| views | 47 | |
| downloads | 50 |

Views provided by UsageCounts
Downloads provided by UsageCounts