Erratum to: J Comput Neurosci (2013) 34:285301DOI 10.1007/s10827-012-0421-9In Section 2.5 of our paper (Sharafi et al. 2013), we gave in Eq. (39) an approximate expression for the power spectrum of the synchronous output, consisting of a zeroth-order term and three correction terms, which are proportional to the signal’s variance (our small parameter). One of these correction terms was miscalculated. The correct formula in Eq. (39) should read:Note that we also replaced the phrase “n-times” etc. used in the original formula by the more precise formulation “n terms”.Equation (39) in Ref. (Sharafi et al. 2013) was also used to approximate the power spectrum of the synchronous output for the special cases of populations with n=2 or n=3 Poisson neurons. Hence, the respective formulas for this power spectrum, Eqs. (51) and (52) in Ref. (Sharafi et al. 2013), have to be corrected as well. We recall that for Poisson neurons, we can simplify the general formula Eq. (39) using that χ(f)=r0 [Eq. 42 in Ref. (Sharafi et al. 2013)] and that [Eq. (42) in Ref. (Sharafi et al. 2013)], assuming a high cutoff frequency of the stimulus [ f≫1/(2πσ)].The correct formula for n=2 replacing (51) in Ref. (Sharafi et al. 2013) reads:
where β=2π2σ2 and we also used that for f∈(0,f) which is valid for f≫1/(2πσ) as already assumed above.For n=3, Eq. (52) should be replaced by
We used the corrected formulas to recalculate our approximations for the power spectrum and coherence functions for the populations of Poisson neurons and of LIF neurons, respectively, and found virtually no difference to our previous results. It turned out that for the signal amplitudes used in our paper, the term in question only slightly affects the approximation of the power spectrum.We also would like to emphasize that our qualitative explanation of information filtering by synchrony is based on the zeroth-order approximation of the power spectrum and thus is not affected at all by the modified correction term. Hence, all our conclusions drawn from the theory in Ref. (Sharafi et al. 2013) remain valid.We would like to thank Alexandra Kruscha, Bernstein Center for Computational Neuroscience Berlin, for pointing out the error to us.