Retinal neurons: cell types and coupled networks

Retinal neurons with distinct dendritic morphologies are likely to comprise different cell types, subject to three important caveats. First, it is necessary to avoid creating “artificial” cell types based on arbitrary criteria—for example, the presence of two or three primary dendrites. Second, it is essential to take into account changes in morphology with retinal eccentricity and cell density. Third, the retina contains imperfections like any natural system and a significant number of retinal neurons display aberrant morphologies or make aberrant connections that are not typical of the population as a whole. Many types of retinal ganglion cells show diverse patterns of tracer coupling, with the simplest pattern represented by the homologous coupling shown by On-Off direction-selective (DS) ganglion cells in the rabbit retina. Neighboring DS ganglion cells with a common preferred direction have regularly spaced somata and territorial dendritic fields, whereas DS ganglion cells with different preferred directions may have closely spaced somata and overlapping dendritic fields.

A Comparison of Bayesian and Sampling Theory Inferences in a Probit Model

HE PROBIT MODEL IS A POPULAR DEVICE for explaining binary choice decisions in econometrics. It has been used to describe choices such as labor force participation, travel mode, home ownership, and type of education. These and many more examples can be found in papers by Amemiya (1981) and Maddala (1983). Given the contribution of economics towards explaining such choices, and given the nature of data that are collected, prior information on the relationship between a choice probability and several explanatory variables frequently exists. Bayesian inference is a convenient vehicle for including such prior information. Given the increasing popularity of Bayesian inference it is useful to ask whether inferences from a probit model are sensitive to a choice between Bayesian and sampling theory techniques. Of interest is the sensitivity of inference on coefficients, probabilities, and elasticities. We consider these issues in a model designed to explain choice between fixed and variable interest rate mortgages. Two Bayesian priors are employed: a uniform prior on the coefficients, designed to be noninformative for the coefficients, and an inequality restricted prior on the signs of the coefficients. We often know, a priori, whether increasing the value of a particular explanatory variable will have a positive or negative effect on a choice probability. This knowledge can be captured by using a prior probability density function (pdf) that is truncated to be positive or negative. Thus, three sets of results are compared:those from maximum likelihood (ML) estimation, those from Bayesian estimation with an unrestricted uniform prior on the coefficients, and those from Bayesian estimation with a uniform prior truncated to accommodate inequality restrictions on the coefficients.