Paper detail

Validation of neural spike sorting algorithms without ground-truth information

We describe a suite of validation metrics that assess the credibility of a given automatic spike sorting algorithm applied to a given electrophysiological recording, when ground-truth is unavailable. By rerunning the spike sorter two or more times, the metrics measure stability under various perturbations consistent with variations in the data itself, making no assumptions about the noise model, nor about the internal workings of the sorting algorithm. Such stability is a prerequisite for reproducibility of results. We illustrate the metrics on standard sorting algorithms for both in vivo and ex vivo recordings. We believe that such metrics could reduce the significant human labor currently spent on validation, and should form an essential part of large-scale automated spike sorting and systematic benchmarking of algorithms.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.