[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: matlab to Octave conversion

Subject: Re: matlab to Octave conversion
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 19:49:49 +0100

The model is from this paper. The author sent it to me to play around with. The model is for Figure 8 (a) of the paper. It is all pretty complex and I am looking into it - because I'm very interested in purkinje bistability. Do you think that the model is flawed? Thanks so much for taking the time with me. I am so grateful.

Bistability of cerebellar Purkinje cells modulated by sensory stimulation
Yonatan Loewenstein1, 2, 3, 6, Séverine Mahon4, 6, Paul Chadderton4, Kazuo Kitamura4, Haim Sompolinsky2, 5, Yosef Yarom1, 2 & Michael Häusser4

PDF of paper and supplementry information is available at the authors website:

From: "" <address@hidden>
To: MICHAEL FORREST <address@hidden>
CC: address@hidden
Subject: Re: matlab to Octave conversion
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 00:16:18 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: from ([]) by with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.2444); Tue, 13 Jun 2006 21:17:08 -0700 Received: from ([]) by with ESMTP; 14 Jun 2006 00:17:06 -0400 Received: from by pm6 for 0s (PureMessage); Wed Jun 14 00:16:19 2006 Received: from ( [])(authenticated bits=0)by (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id k5E4GIG72499882(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NOT);Wed, 14 Jun 2006 00:16:19 -0400 (EDT)
X-Message-Info: LsUYwwHHNt3660MmjhEvYg2f34OAemlKtU9j2Z7TuGo=
References: <address@hidden>
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.6.2 (2.6.2-1.fc5.5) X-PMX-Version:, Antispam-Engine:, Antispam-Data: 2006.6.13.203432 (pm6)
X-PMX-Spam: Gauge=IIIIIII, Probability=7%, Report='__CT 0, __CTYPE_HAS_BOUNDARY 0, __CTYPE_MULTIPART 0, __HAS_MSGID 0, __HAS_X_MAILER 0, __MIME_VERSION 0, __SANE_MSGID 0'
Return-Path: address@hidden
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Jun 2006 04:17:08.0492 (UTC) FILETIME=[66C14CC0:01C68F69]

On Tue, 2006-06-13 at 22:03 +0100, MICHAEL FORREST wrote:
> Is this supposed to be current clamp and voltage clamp?
> Yes.

I do not believe the code you submitted was correct in voltage clamp
mode. Voltage should be fixed to the command voltage in voltage clamp
mode and I do not believe that was the case with the code you submitted.

In current clamp one injects a command current and measures cell
voltage. In voltage clamp the cell voltage is driven by the electrode
and the driving current is interpreted as the membrane current. The code
you submitted does not do the sorts of things one expects for the two

PLEASE, e-mail me if this does not make sense.

<< signature.asc >>

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]