Deviance Detection in Rat Auditory Cortex Figure 10. A comparison between the model predictions and the experimental observations. Scatter plots of all the measured responses (abscissa) versus the corresponding fits from the model based on all the data (ordinate) for each value of Df. A. LFP data. B. MUA data. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0023369.g010 Figure 11. Model error and half-width of the adaptation channel. A. Distribution of the sum of squared errors between responses and fitted values, divided by the sum of squared s.e.m of the responses. The terms of both sums were weighted by the square root of the number of presentations of the corresponding stimulus. For comparison, the thin line indicates the average of the F(n,n) distributions associated with each of the sites, where n, the number of degrees of freedom, is the number of responses that were fitted by the model at that site. Vertical dotted line - the 0.05 critical value of the average F distribution. The majority of the models (51/84 of the models fitted to LFP responses, 61%, and 28/69 of those fitted to MUA responses, 81%) had an error ratio below this limit. B. Distribution of the half width of the adaptation channel, s, in all recording sites at which the fitting procedure converged successfully. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0023369.g011 PLoS ONE | www.plosone.org 11 August 2011 | Volume 6 | Issue 8 | e23369