The phrase "a function of stimulus contrast" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used in contexts related to psychology, neuroscience, or any field discussing perception and response to varying stimuli.
Example: "The visual perception of the object is a function of stimulus contrast, affecting how we interpret its edges and details."
Alternatives: "dependent on stimulus contrast" or "related to stimulus contrast".
Figure 3 shows the Kullback-Leibler divergence as a function of stimulus contrast.
Recent studies emphasize the dynamic nature of the center-surround interactions based on the results that the length summation areas of cortical neuron receptive fields are not fixed, but vary as a function of stimulus contrast [35], [42], [43].
The performance of the animals in the 2 different tasks as a function of stimulus contrast is shown in Figure 3.
This analysis included contrast estimates for switch and stay events as a function of stimulus and PM condition.
Whereas for a single stimulus, only fast latencies are observed, slow and asynchronous latencies appear after the second stimulus and become more prominent as a function of stimulus number during an AP train.
We analysed the BOLD signal change as a function of stimulus type following stimulus onset within our ROI.
The response of the example V1 cell increased as a function of the stimulus contrast, whereas attention also influenced the responses: the neuronal activity was stronger when attention was directed to the stimulus inside the RF than when attention was directed to the stimulus in the opposite hemifield.
The influence of stimulus contrast and stimulus type (grating vs. plaid) on firing rates and on LFP band-limited power spectra was determined by using a two-factor anova (for experiments where a fixed stimulus of different contrasts was presented).
The responses in Figure 5B are plotted as a function of the null stimulus contrast.
The data averaged across all recording sites are in line with this suggestion (Fig. 3). Figure 3A and B shows the spiking activity (normalized and non-normalized, respectively) as a function of contrast and stimulus type.
One possible explanation for the discrepant results is that stimulus contrast may only affect dwell times in a certain range of stimulus contrasts, near the detection threshold: Research on reading has shown that stimulus contrast only modulates dwell times when the stimulus contrast is very low, and the detectability approaches the detection threshold [9] [10] [13] [15].
