Varying Oddball Types (e.g., for gain control)

[maierav]

Would it be possible to have more than just one oddball? Right now, if I am understand correctly, the oddball uncouples the speed of the optic flow from the running speed by replaying optic flow from another recording session. Is that correct? So even if the mouse stops running altogether, the visual stimulus will still move? Does it happen frequently that a mouse (briefly) stops running?

Could we vary the speed (i.e., gain) of the optic flow so that it does not uncouple entirely from the mouse running, just make it "odd" by moving quicker or slower than what would be expected?

[jeromelecoq]

So the plan outlined 4 oddballs that were shared across the tasks :
2 alternative drifting orientations, one omission and one halt of the drift.
The plan was to show those 4 across sensory-motor, sequential and standard oddball.

I think we were interested in comparing the same error in the different contexts.

The gain change could be done but wouldn't we also want them in the other contexts?

There is also the statistical power question. Each oddball type takes time to be measured during one session. The more oddball the less we have data for each.

I am open to all but which oddballs are the most informative?

[Sarruedi]

Varying the gain instead could certainly offer a more graded form of mismatch while still preserving some behavioral relevance. It’s an interesting idea, though I’m not sure how well it would align with the current experimental design, since the other oddball types don’t manipulate temporal frequency in a graded manner either.

That said, it could potentially be a great extension to the current paradigms that one could test within individual labs. That way, we wouldn’t have to compromise the number of stimulus repetition or experimental balance in the current design. Given how large the parameter space is, it probably makes sense to keep the core design streamlined to ensure sufficient statistical power for the cross-condition comparisons.

[jeromelecoq]

I don't recollect if Keller's lab did this gain change. I guess they probably tried it? I would think this could be quite sensitive to how much training the mouse got. The gain heavily depends on the distance to the screen so I would expect the more training you got the more precise is your prediction of the screen speed.