# Bressloff and Rule Modeling Deep Dive

Source: https://mesmerprism.com/projects/bressloff-v1-form-constants-deep-dive.html
Canonical HTML: https://mesmerprism.com/projects/bressloff-v1-form-constants-deep-dive.html
Generated: 2026-05-26
Description: A notebook-style deep dive into Bressloff form constants, Rule flicker modeling, and generated driven neural-field diagnostics after Rule.
Markdown: https://mesmerprism.com/projects/bressloff-v1-form-constants-deep-dive.md
Plain text: https://mesmerprism.com/projects/bressloff-v1-form-constants-deep-dive.txt
BibTeX references: https://mesmerprism.com/projects/bressloff-v1-form-constants-deep-dive.bib
CSL JSON references: https://mesmerprism.com/projects/bressloff-v1-form-constants-deep-dive.references.csl.json

---

Modeling deep dive

# Bressloff and Rule Modeling Deep Dive

 Geometric hallucination models become useful when their equations stay close
 to the image. Bressloff's orientation-hypercolumn account asks how cortical
 symmetry and retino-cortical mapping can generate tunnels, cobwebs, lattices,
 and honeycombs. Rule, Stoffregen, and Ermentrout ask a different question:
 how periodic flicker can destabilize a scalar excitatory/inhibitory field into
 high-frequency period-doubled stripes or lower-frequency hexagonal patterns
 ([Bressloff et al., 2001](https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2000.0769);
 [Rule et al., 2011](https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002158)).

 [Sequential examples](https://mesmerprism.com/projects/bressloff-v1-form-constants-deep-dive.html#examples)
 [Model split](https://mesmerprism.com/projects/bressloff-v1-form-constants-deep-dive.html#model-split)
 [Rule flicker model](https://mesmerprism.com/projects/bressloff-v1-form-constants-deep-dive.html#rule)
 [Rule explorer](https://mesmerprism.com/projects/bressloff-v1-form-constants-deep-dive.html#rule-explorer)
 [After Rule](https://mesmerprism.com/projects/bressloff-v1-form-constants-deep-dive.html#after-rule)
 [Driven reports](https://mesmerprism.com/projects/bressloff-v1-form-constants-deep-dive.html#driven-reports)
 [Source methods](https://mesmerprism.com/projects/bressloff-v1-form-constants-deep-dive.html#source-methods)
 [Bressloff overview](https://mesmerprism.com/projects/bressloff-v1-form-constants.html)
 [References](https://mesmerprism.com/projects/bressloff-v1-form-constants-deep-dive.html#references)

 What this page adds

## Two model families, one calibration record

 The shorter Bressloff page shows generated visual forms. This deep dive
 separates the model families behind them: Bressloff's orientation-hypercolumn
 planforms and retino-cortical mapping, and Rule's periodically forced
 excitatory/inhibitory field for flicker-induced phosphenes. The two tracks
 share visual-field questions but not claims.

 The status tables record which generated targets currently pass, which remain
 approximate, and which published figures are not reproduced here for rights
 reasons.

### Figure-use policy

 Mesmer Prism uses generated model outputs unless an original article
 figure is clearly open-licensed or reproduced with permission. Generated
 images cite the source model but are not scans, crops, or reproductions
 of the paper figures.

### Safety boundary

 The visuals here are explanatory model outputs, not a photic-stimulation
 protocol. Frequency parameters are model parameters, not safety-cleared
 exposure recommendations.

 Historical problem

## Why these shapes invite a cortical model

 Reports of geometric visual hallucinations recur around a small vocabulary:
 tunnels, spirals, rays, cobwebs, lattices, checkerboards, funnels, and
 honeycombs. The modeling question is not whether those pictures can be
 drawn. It is whether a plausible cortical system has natural pattern-forming
 modes that resemble them after the map from visual space to V1 is taken
 seriously ([Ermentrout and Cowan, 1979](https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00336965);
 [Bressloff et al., 2002](https://doi.org/10.1162/089976602317250861)).

 The older scalar cortical-sheet story already explains why stripes, squares,
 and hexagons matter. Bressloff, Cowan, Golubitsky, Thomas, and Wiener add
 the retino-cortical transform and V1 orientation preference structure, so
 some hallucinations become locally oriented contour fields rather than only
 bright and dark scalar activity.

### Scalar cortical sheet

 Useful for rings, rays, spirals, and some light-dark lattices because
 cortical stripes map cleanly through the complex-log retino-cortical
 transform.

### Orientation hypercolumns

 Needed for cobwebs, honeycombs, and lattice tunnels that are better
 described as locally oriented contours than as only bright and dark
 regions.

### Flicker E/I field

 Rule's model belongs beside Bressloff's track, not inside it: the core
 object is a periodically forced excitatory/inhibitory field with scalar
 spatial kernels.

 Bressloff model family

## Orientation-hypercolumn planforms

 The implementation keeps Bressloff's family as
 model_family = bressloff_orientation_hypercolumn . It reuses
 retino-cortical rendering where the mathematics calls for it, but does not
 treat later flicker models as Bressloff paper presets.

### Position map

 \[
 \begin{aligned}
 x &\simeq \log r_R \\
 y &\simeq \theta_R
 \end{aligned}
 \]

 Circles, rays, and logarithmic spirals in visual space become vertical,
 horizontal, and oblique stripes in cortical coordinates.

### Orientation map

 \[
 \phi = \phi_R - \theta_R,
 \qquad
 \phi_R = \phi + \theta_R
 \]

 Local retinal contour orientation is measured relative to angular
 visual-field position. The renderer uses the equivalent drawing
 convention when it places contour glyphs.

### Hypercolumn field

 \[
 \frac{\partial a(\mathbf r,\phi,t)}{\partial t}
 =
 -a(\mathbf r,\phi,t)
 + \mu \int
 w(\mathbf r,\phi;\mathbf r',\phi')\,
 \sigma(a(\mathbf r',\phi',t))\,
 d\mathbf r'\,d\phi'
 \]

 The weight separates local isotropic coupling inside a hypercolumn from
 anisotropic long-range coupling between similarly tuned orientation
 patches.

### Planform modes

 \[
 a(\mathbf r,\phi)
 \sim
 \sum_j c_j\,u(\phi-\phi_j)\,
 \exp(i\,\mathbf k_j\cdot\mathbf r)
 \]

 Rolls, squares, rhombs, and hexagonal branches are selected from finite
 wavevector sets and then mapped into retinal space.

 Sequential examples

## Generated cells from the current implementation

 These loops are static exports from the Rust/browser implementation. They
 are generated images, not scans of the source papers, and they should be read
 as qualitative model illustrations unless a row explicitly says it has passed
 a calibration check.

 Cell 01

### 2002 roll mode: cortical stripes before remapping

 The simplest Bressloff example is a cortical roll: a striped activity
 pattern in cortical coordinates. In the visual field, the same family can
 become rings, rays, or spirals depending on stripe orientation.

 Preset fig5_roll_cortical

 Source Bressloff et al. 2002 Figure 5

 Model family Bressloff orientation hypercolumn

 Cell 02

### Lattice tunnel through the retino-cortical map

 The lattice tunnel shows why the mapping step matters. A structured V1
 planform becomes a tunnel-like field when projected into visual-field
 coordinates, making the radial expansion of the retino-cortical map
 visible.

 Preset fig7_lattice_tunnel

 Source Bressloff et al. 2002 Figure 7

 Status qualitative rendered target pass

 Cell 03

### Single inverse map: non-contoured square cells

 Figures 29 and 30 in the 2001 paper show scalar activity before local
 contour orientation is drawn. The implementation thresholds bright and
 dark regions, maps them back to visual-field coordinates, and leaves the
 orientation-glyph layer out.

 Preset fig29_square_noncontoured

 Source Bressloff et al. 2001 Figure 29, Table 2

 Status rendered target pass; threshold geometry approximate

 Cell 04

### Double map: square even contours

 The square even case adds the local orientation field, so the output is
 closer to a cobweb of contour fragments than to a scalar checkerboard.
 The current renderer draws the target family, while the local branch
 selector still prefers a roll branch under the same diagnostics.

 Preset fig31_square_even

 Source Bressloff et al. 2001 Figure 31

 Status rendered target review; branch diagnostic mismatch

 Cell 05

### Rhombic even branch as a cleaner calibration case

 The rhombic example is currently the cleanest agreement case: the
 rendered family and branch selector both identify the rhombic target.
 That makes it a useful baseline for later figure-level image metrics.

 Preset fig33_rhombic_even

 Source Bressloff et al. 2001 Figure 33

 Status rendered target pass; branch diagnostic pass

 Cell 06

### Zero-phase hexagonal even branch

 The zero-phase hexagonal even example gives a honeycomb-like retinal
 image. It tests whether the preset registry can distinguish hexagonal
 phase partners instead of treating every three-wave branch as the same
 picture.

 Preset fig35_hex_zero_even

 Source Bressloff et al. 2001 Figure 35

 Status rendered target pass

 Cell 07

### Triangular odd branch and the current fidelity limit

 The triangular odd target is useful because it exposes a limit of the
 first-pass implementation. The renderer can draw the requested triangular
 family, but the present stability and branch diagnostics do not yet
 reproduce the full higher-order odd-hexagonal selection described in the
 paper.

 Preset fig36_triangle_odd

 Source Bressloff et al. 2001 Figure 36

 Status rendered target review; higher-order branch work deferred

 Calibration reports

## What the current registry can say

 The implementation currently separates source-figure identity, rendered
 target, contour mode, and branch-selection diagnostics. That is deliberately
 conservative: the page can say that a generated figure resembles a source
 target without pretending that all stability curves, phase conventions, or
 higher-order amplitude terms have already been recovered.

 24 Bressloff paper and convenience presets

 17 rendered target passes

 7 review targets for branch or stability fidelity

 Bressloff geometry calibration

## Generated stills against private numeric targets

 This surface shows generated implementation stills and public-safe metric
 summaries. Original paper scans and crops are not displayed here; when a
 private source-derived profile exists, only derived numeric comparison
 fields are loaded.

 Format available after report load

 Generated stills available after report load

 Source comparisons available after report load

 Mean edge density available after report load

 Generated-still metric summary appears here when the report asset is available.

 Rule flicker model family

## A separate scalar E/I simulation track

 Rule, Stoffregen, and Ermentrout model flicker-induced phosphenes using a
 forced excitatory/inhibitory neural field and then study spatial instabilities
 over flicker frequency and stimulus parameters. The public implementation
 names this as model_family = rule_flicker_ei and keeps it
 separate from Bressloff's orientation-hypercolumn registry.

### E/I field

 \[
 \begin{aligned}
 \tau_e \frac{\partial U_e}{\partial t}
 &=
 -U_e + F(a_{ee}K_e * U_e - a_{ei}K_i * U_i - \theta_e + g_e S(t)) \\
 \tau_i \frac{\partial U_i}{\partial t}
 &=
 -U_i + F(a_{ie}K_e * U_e - a_{ii}K_i * U_i - \theta_i + g_i S(t))
 \end{aligned}
 \]

 The implementation uses two scalar fields over a periodic two-dimensional
 domain with normalized Gaussian kernels.

### Flicker stimulus

 \[
 S(t) = A\,H\!\left(\sin\!\left(\frac{2\pi t}{T}\right)-\vartheta\right)
 \]

 Period \(T\), amplitude \(A\), threshold, smoothing,
 and inhibitory feed-forward fraction are exposed as explicit parameters.

### Temporal check

 \[
 C(T)\approx -1,\quad C(2T)\approx 1
 \qquad\text{versus}\qquad
 C(T)>0
 \]

 The qualitative report compares frames one and two forcing periods apart,
 which is enough for a first period-doubling sanity check.

### Floquet boundary check

 \[
 \dot v = D_u f(u_0(t),t;k)\,v,
 \qquad
 v(T)=M(k)v(0),
 \qquad
 \lambda\in\sigma(M(k))
 \]

 The current report computes first-pass monodromy boundary markers and
 Figure 8 curve comparisons. Published-axis reproduction remains
 calibration work, not a settled claim.

### Rule model status

- Implemented: qualitative high-frequency and low-frequency presets, one-period/two-period correlation checks, and Fourier-family readouts.

- Partial: sweep maps, monodromy hints, and domain-normalized Figure 8 beta-axis comparison.

- Deferred: exact digitized reproduction of published phase-boundary figures.

- Not claimed: prediction of a viewer's hallucinations from stimulus frequency.

### Explorer status

 The public explorer loads static JSON reports when they are present.
 If a report asset is absent, the qualitative Rule presets and claim
 ledger remain the public surface rather than showing repeated empty
 map states.

 Rule Dynamics Explorer v1

### Synchronized flicker, E/I response, and spatial modes

 This explorer shows the two qualitative Rule regimes as linked
 views: stimulus pulse, reduced excitatory/inhibitory response,
 scalar cortical field, dominant Fourier family, the one-period
 versus two-period temporal check, and a simulator-backed sweep
 report where available. It is an explanatory model view, not a
 stimulus protocol.

 Model family
 rule_flicker_ei

 Active preset
 High-frequency stripes

 Response
 period doubled

 Pattern depth
 0.82

 High-frequency stripes

 Low-frequency hexagons

 Pause

 View

 Cortical field
 Retinal projection

 Time

 Amplitude

 0.80

 I drive

 0.00

#### Stimulus and E/I traces

 stimulus
 excitatory
 inhibitory

#### Fourier mode readout

 Stripe axis

 0.92

 Hexagonal triplet

 0.18

#### Period check

 C(T) -0.99

 C(2T) 0.98

 Stimulus period 55 ms

#### Frequency sweep strip

 Sweep report summary appears here when the JSON asset is available.

 140 ms

 Regime low frequency

 Modes hexagonal

 Peak 0.00

 120 ms

 Regime one to one

 Modes hexagonal

 Peak 0.00

 85 ms

 Regime transition

 Modes mixed

 Peak 0.00

 65 ms

 Regime stripe onset

 Modes stripe

 Peak 0.00

 55 ms

 Regime period doubled

 Modes stripe

 Peak 0.00

 Low-frequency mode
 available after report load

 Transition mode
 available after report load

 High-frequency mode
 available after report load

#### Frequency-amplitude map

 Dense sweep-map summary appears here when the JSON asset is available.

 Floquet boundary summary appears here when the JSON asset is available.

 Point available after report load

 Regime available after report load

 Spatial score available after report load

 Temporal score available after report load

 Floquet available after report load

 Note available after report load

#### Rule Figure 8 refined boundary curves

 Figure 8 curve comparison appears here when the report assets are available.

 Parameter set available after report load

 Branches available after report load

 Points available after report load

 Beta RMS available after report load

 Continuity available after report load

 Beta map available after report load

#### A. Flicker input

 The forcing term \(S(t)\) supplies periodic drive with exposed
 amplitude and period. It is a temporal input before any spatial
 pattern is visible.

#### B. Homogeneous E/I response

 The reduced traces show the driven excitatory and inhibitory
 populations. Their relative timing sets the gain available to
 spatial modes.

#### C. Spatial perturbation growth

 The scalar field view shows pattern amplitude riding on the E/I
 response. The amplitude and I-drive sliders expose weak,
 patterned, and suppressed cases.

#### D. Low-frequency branch

 Longer forcing periods are represented as one-to-one hexagonal
 responses, matching the qualitative low-frequency island.

#### E. High-frequency branch

 Shorter periods favor stripe-like modes with a two-cycle temporal
 signature: \(C(T)\) is negative while \(C(2T)\) returns positive.

#### F. Floquet boundary map

 The sweep strip and frequency-amplitude map now read simulator
 reports. Sign-change markers show where the monodromy threshold
 conditions cross on the current grid, and the report now refines
 beta-axis crossings into first-pass boundary curve points. Exact
 published-axis calibration remains the next rigorous layer.

 The live field and trace controls are an explanatory browser projection of
 the current qualitative presets. The sweep strip, map, and monodromy hints
 read Rust simulator reports when the JSON assets are available.

 Cell 08

### High-frequency flicker: period-doubled stripes

 The high-frequency qualitative preset represents the stripe island in
 Rule's Figure 4. The period-doubling signature is temporal: after one
 forcing cycle, foreground and background approximately exchange; after
 two cycles, the pattern matches again.

 Preset rule_fig4_high_freq_stripes

 Stimulus 55 ms representative period

 Check rT = -0.99 , r2T = 0.98

 Cell 09

### Lower-frequency flicker: one-to-one hexagons

 The lower-frequency qualitative preset represents the hexagonal island.
 The current version uses a 120 ms representative rather than claiming
 exact reproduction of the 110 ms panel in the paper.

 Preset rule_fig4_low_freq_hexagons

 Stimulus 120 ms qualitative representative

 Check rT = 0.30 , r2T = 0.90

 After Rule

## Driven neural fields, not one straight line

 The lineage after Rule splits into driven-input problems and architecture
 extensions. Rule models diffuse periodic flicker. Nicks, Cocks,
 Avitabile, Johnston, and Coombes model spatial forcing and orthogonal
 response in Billock-Tsou-style effects. Tamekue, Prandi, and Chitour
 treat MacKay stimuli as localized inputs that break symmetry and act as
 controls in an Amari neural field. Bolelli and Prandi then combine
 localization with time-periodic input, giving a current framework for
 flickering visual stimuli whose model contours depend on frequency and
 inhibition
 ([Nicks et al., 2021](https://doi.org/10.1137/20M1366885);
 [Tamekue et al., 2024](https://doi.org/10.1137/23M1616686);
 [Bolelli and Prandi, 2025](https://doi.org/10.1007/s10851-025-01257-7)).

 A second branch complicates the cortical architecture itself: pinwheel
 lattices, long-range connections, color dimensions, contrast polarity, and
 perceptual grouping. These do not replace the Bressloff simulator; they
 show what it abstracts away
 ([Veltz et al., 2015](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13408-015-0023-8);
 [Faugeras et al., 2022](https://doi.org/10.5802/crmath.289);
 [Carroll and Bressloff, 2018](https://doi.org/10.1137/16M1076125);
 [Sarti and Citti, 2015](https://doi.org/10.1007/s10827-014-0540-6)).

 Branch
 Source
 Input type
 Model output
 Use in Mesmer Prism

 Spontaneous form constants
 Ermentrout-Cowan; Bressloff et al.
 No visual input or parameter shift
 Planforms mapped to tunnels, spirals, lattices, and cobwebs
 Current simulator core

 Diffuse flicker
 Rule et al. 2011
 Spatially homogeneous time-periodic forcing
 Frequency-dependent phosphene regimes
 Rule panel and explorer

 Spatial forcing
 Nicks et al. 2021
 Periodic spatial input
 Orthogonal response and 2:1 resonance
 Nicks generated diagnostic report

 Localized static input
 Tamekue et al. 2024
 MacKay rays or target plus localized control
 Input-biased orthogonal contours
 MacKay generated diagnostic report

 Localized time-periodic input
 Bolelli and Prandi 2025
 Flickering localized input
 Periodic state and contour width versus frequency/inhibition
 Bolelli generated diagnostic report

 Pinwheel architecture
 Veltz et al. 2015
 More realistic V1 lattice and long-range connections
 Symmetry-restricted planforms and hexagonal robustness
 Architecture caveat

 Color V1
 Faugeras et al. 2022
 Hue and saturation dimensions
 Spatio-chromatic planforms and localized snaking states
 Extension layer

 Contrast gradients
 Carroll and Bressloff 2018
 Contrast-polarity/orientation field
 Gradient-direction encoding
 "Not hallucination only" sidebar

 Perceptual units
 Sarti and Citti 2015
 Visual input plus neurogeometry
 Eigenmodes as perceptual units
 Grouping note

### Spatial forcing and orthogonal response

 Nicks et al. provide the bridge from diffuse flicker toward
 Billock-Tsou-style sensory-induced hallucinations. Under the
 retino-cortical map, rings and arms become orthogonal cortical stripe
 families, and a spatially forced neural field can support an
 orthogonal response when the resonance conditions are right.

### Localized MacKay input

 Tamekue, Prandi, and Chitour recast the MacKay branch as an
 input-output problem. The stimulus is represented as a cortical input
 through the retino-cortical map, and localized information breaks the
 global symmetry of a regular funnel or tunnel pattern.

### Time-periodic localized input

 Bolelli and Prandi are the current endpoint for this page: localized
 geometric input and periodic forcing are studied in one neural-field
 framework. Frequency remains a model parameter, not a safe exposure
 recommendation.

### Architecture and extensions

 Pinwheel lattices, color dimensions, contrast-polarity fields, and
 perceptual-unit models show that V1 neural-field mathematics is broader
 than hallucination geometry. The page should use them to clarify the
 simulator's abstractions, not to broaden its claims.

### Generated visual policy

 No full PDFs, paper figure scans, page renders, or source-figure crops
 are hosted for this branch. New visuals should be generated in Mesmer
 Prism style unless a paper figure is clearly reusable and captioned with
 its license, source, and change notes.

 Driven report surface

## The implemented continuation is source-target diagnostic, not calibrated

 The current public assets expose three generated driven-field report
 families. The MacKay report covers localized stationary input. The
 Bolelli report covers localized time-periodic input, period-lock
 diagnostics, and an accepted source-side principal-pole width
 convention with generated decay-width fit diagnostics and
 Figure 5 source-equation curve samples. This is not
 source-panel calibration. The Nicks report
 covers 2:1 orthogonal-response amplitude
 diagnostics, Appendix-B kernel-derived coefficient tables,
 source-equation Figure 8 boundary residual checks, and a
 source-derived acceptance policy. None
 of these are paper-figure reproductions or calibration
 claims.

 ...
 registered driven examples in the public-safe model registry.

 ...
 implemented entries with generated report targets.

 ...
 partial entries awaiting stronger source-target metrics.

 ...
 JSON report families mirrored into the website assets.

 Claim level
 diagnostic/source-target; not calibrated

 Formats
 loading report formats...

 Source
 loading generated report JSON...

 Computational provenance

## What the original papers say about software

 The source record is mixed. Some papers name concrete software stacks;
 others mainly expose equations, symmetry arguments, numerical methods, or
 figure descriptions. Mesmer Prism uses that provenance to decide what kind
 of implementation is credible here, while keeping the public outputs as
 generated diagnostics and source-target comparisons rather than
 original-code reproductions.

 Source track
 Original-author workflow named in the paper record
 How Mesmer Prism treats it

 Bressloff form constants
 Analytic retinocortical map, Euclidean symmetry, orientation-hypercolumn planforms, and bifurcation analysis; no named figure-code stack identified.
 Independent Rust implementation with generated planforms and explicit comparison reports, not original-code reuse.

 Rule flicker E/I field
 AUTO through XPPAUT, Floquet/monodromy stability calculations, and custom two-dimensional periodic-grid simulations.
 Rust sweep and Floquet diagnostics stay first-pass until report-backed source-axis fits support stronger language.

 Nicks spatial forcing
 MATLAB simulations, FFT-based pseudo-spectral convolution, ode45 , and XPPAUT checks for reduced amplitude-equation stability.
 Current reports implement reduced amplitude-equation and boundary diagnostics; full half-space field simulations remain deferred.

 Tamekue-Prandi-Chitour MacKay model
 Julia visualization/solver workflow and fixed-point iteration for stationary Amari neural fields.
 The Rust MacKay report keeps a compact fixed-point diagnostic and records generated metrics without claiming source-panel reproduction.

 Bolelli-Prandi periodic input
 Mathematica for principal-pole calculations and Julia for nonlinear mean-field simulations.
 Pole-width formulas are source-target diagnostics; Figure 5 source-equation curves are generated from equations, and generated decay-width fits share the convention only when the fit gate passes. True source-panel digitization is reserved for later plot-image comparison.

 Veltz pinwheel architecture
 Trilinos, FFTW, PETSc, petsc4py , Newton-Krylov/GMRES, Arnoldi eigensolvers, BDF integration, and large meshes.
 Pinwheel dynamics are treated as a high-cost architecture extension, not near-term Rust report work.

 Faugeras-Song-Veltz color field
 Julia, BifurcationKit.jl, KrylovKit.jl, pseudo-arclength continuation, CUDA.jl, and GPU FFTs.
 Color hallucinations and localized snaking remain deferred until the project has a continuation/color architecture layer.

 Carroll-Bressloff and Sarti-Citti
 Mathematica algebraic checks for Carroll-Bressloff; mean-field discretization, affinity matrices, eigenvectors, and MCMC-style estimation for Sarti-Citti.
 Both stay as adjacent perceptual-function tracks unless this project expands beyond driven hallucination-style diagnostics.

### Why this matters

 The original papers do not share one software lineage. Some are
 analytic, some are continuation-heavy, and some use MATLAB, Julia, or
 Mathematica for specific parts of the workflow. A single Rust simulator
 should therefore expose model-family reports and validation status
 rather than pretending all figures come from one executable model.

### Current claim level

 The generated assets here are diagnostics, calibration targets, and
 source-target comparisons. They are not produced by the authors'
 original scripts, and they are not presented as calibrated
 reproductions of private or permission-bound source figures.

### Implementation consequence

 Near-term work should keep tightening Bolelli source-equation
 diagnostics and Nicks region-boundary residual policies. Veltz/Faugeras
 continuation, GPU, color, and pinwheel stacks should wait until
 the report layer can support that complexity.

 Claim ledger

## What is solid, partial, or deferred

 Claim
 Current level
 Next work

 Bressloff and Rule are separate model families.
 Implemented in public metadata and page structure.
 Design a cross-model registry only when more families need shared indexing.

 Bressloff examples reproduce named visual families.
 Qualitative generated target checks for the current preset catalog.
 Digitize source figures and add image metrics.

 Rule high-frequency and low-frequency examples show different regimes.
 Qualitative seeded E/I simulations with temporal-correlation checks, Fourier-family scores, and first sweep-map diagnostics.
 Calibrate exact Rule Figure 5 and Figure 6 parameter locations.

 The public article explains Rule's temporal mechanism visually.
 Client-side explorer links flicker, E/I traces, mode family, period checks, sweep strip, dense map, and monodromy hints.
 Calibrate dense Rule Figure 6 and Figure 8 phase boundaries.

 Later work extends the lineage toward driven neural fields.
 Public taxonomy separates spatial forcing, localized MacKay input, localized time-periodic input, pinwheel architecture, color extensions, contrast-gradient encoding, and perceptual grouping. MacKay, Bolelli, and Nicks now have generated first-pass diagnostic reports.
 Add source-derived numeric targets before calling any driven output calibrated.

 The original papers used one shared software stack.
 Not claimed here. The source record names different workflows across papers, including XPPAUT/AUTO, MATLAB, Julia, Mathematica, PETSc/Trilinos, and BifurcationKit.
 Keep implementation provenance separate from generated-report validation.

 Spatial forcing, localized input, and time-periodic input can explain every viewer's percept.
 Not claimed here.
 Requires participant-level data, stimulus calibration, and safety review outside this public model note.

 Flicker frequency predicts individual visual experience.
 Not claimed here.
 Requires participant data, safety constraints, and calibrated stimulus hardware.

 Figure rights ledger

## Which figures can be hosted here

 Figure source
 Public-page treatment
 Rights basis

 Generated Mesmer Prism images
 Hosted here.
 Created by the Mesmer Prism renderer from the described model families.

 Rule et al. 2011 PLOS figures
 Can be reproduced or adapted with attribution and change notes.
 PLOS Computational Biology articles are covered by Creative Commons Attribution reuse terms.

 Bressloff et al. 2001 Royal Society figures
 Reference only unless permission or a specific open license is verified.
 Royal Society journal reuse is routed through its permissions process unless the article license already permits the use.

 Bressloff et al. 2002 Neural Computation figures
 Reference only unless MIT Press permission or a specific open license is verified.
 MIT Press provides a rights and permissions process for journal reuse.

 Ermentrout and Cowan 1979 Springer figures
 Reference only unless Springer permission or a specific open license is verified.
 Springer Nature distinguishes openly licensed material from content requiring reuse permission.

 Bressloff 2012 IOP figures
 Check the article first page; treat as permission-required unless clearly open.
 IOP permissions guidance treats adaptations as permission-bound unless the source license allows reuse.

 Nicks et al. 2021 SIAM figures
 Reference only; redraw concepts for public diagrams.
 Version of record is SIAM-published and the user-provided PDF was a review-purpose manuscript.

 Tamekue et al. 2024 SIAM figures
 Reference only; redraw MacKay examples unless permission is obtained.
 Version of record is SIAM-published; the arXiv manuscript is not treated as figure-reuse permission.

 Bolelli and Prandi 2025 figures
 Reusable only with CC BY attribution and caption-level third-party checks.
 The Springer article is open access under CC BY 4.0 with a third-party material caveat.

 Veltz et al. 2015 figures
 Reusable only with CC BY attribution and caption-level third-party checks.
 The Journal of Mathematical Neuroscience article is distributed under CC BY 4.0.

 Faugeras et al. 2022 figures
 Reusable only with CC BY attribution and caption-level third-party checks.
 The Comptes Rendus Mathematique article page states CC BY 4.0.

 Carroll and Bressloff 2018 SIAM figures
 Reference only unless permission is obtained.
 SIAM copyright applies to the version of record.

 Sarti and Citti 2015 figures
 Reference only; redraw concepts.
 No clear reusable figure license was identified in the local copy; treat Springer version as permission-required unless verified otherwise.

 References

## Sources and implementation lineage

### Model papers

- Ermentrout, G. B., and J. D. Cowan. "[A Mathematical Theory of Visual Hallucination Patterns](https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00336965)." Biological Cybernetics 34 (1979).

- Bressloff, P. C., J. D. Cowan, M. Golubitsky, P. J. Thomas, and M. C. Wiener. "[Geometric Visual Hallucinations, Euclidean Symmetry and the Functional Architecture of Striate Cortex](https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2000.0769)." Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 356 (2001).

- Bressloff, P. C., J. D. Cowan, M. Golubitsky, P. J. Thomas, and M. C. Wiener. "[What Geometric Visual Hallucinations Tell Us About the Visual Cortex](https://doi.org/10.1162/089976602317250861)." Neural Computation 14, no. 3 (2002).

- Bressloff, P. C. "[Spatiotemporal Dynamics of Continuum Neural Fields](https://doi.org/10.1088/1751-8113/45/3/033001)." Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical 45, no. 3 (2012).

- Rule, M., M. Stoffregen, and B. Ermentrout. "[A Model for the Origin and Properties of Flicker-Induced Geometric Phosphenes](https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002158)." PLOS Computational Biology 7, no. 9 (2011).

### Driven-field continuation

- Billock, V. A., and B. H. Tsou. "[Neural Interactions Between Flicker-Induced Self-Organized Visual Hallucinations and Physical Stimuli](https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0610813104)." PNAS 104, no. 20 (2007).

- Nicks, R., A. Cocks, D. Avitabile, A. Johnston, and S. Coombes. "[Understanding Sensory Induced Hallucinations: From Neural Fields to Amplitude Equations](https://doi.org/10.1137/20M1366885)." SIAM Journal on Applied Dynamical Systems 20, no. 4 (2021).

- Tamekue, C., D. Prandi, and Y. Chitour. "[A Mathematical Model of the Visual MacKay Effect](https://doi.org/10.1137/23M1616686)." SIAM Journal on Applied Dynamical Systems 23, no. 3 (2024).

- Bolelli, M. V., and D. Prandi. "[Neural Field Equations with Time-Periodic External Inputs and Some Applications to Visual Processing](https://doi.org/10.1007/s10851-025-01257-7)." Journal of Mathematical Imaging and Vision 67 (2025).

### Architecture and perception extensions

- Veltz, R., P. Chossat, and O. Faugeras. "[On the Effects on Cortical Spontaneous Activity of the Symmetries of the Network of Pinwheels in Visual Area V1](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13408-015-0023-8)." Journal of Mathematical Neuroscience 5 (2015).

- Faugeras, O. D., A. Song, and R. Veltz. "[Spatial and Color Hallucinations in a Mathematical Model of Primary Visual Cortex](https://doi.org/10.5802/crmath.289)." Comptes Rendus Mathematique 360 (2022).

- Carroll, S. R., and P. C. Bressloff. "[Symmetric Bifurcations in a Neural Field Model for Encoding the Direction of Spatial Contrast Gradients](https://doi.org/10.1137/16M1076125)." SIAM Journal on Applied Dynamical Systems 17, no. 1 (2018).

- Sarti, A., and G. Citti. "[The Constitution of Visual Perceptual Units in the Functional Architecture of V1](https://doi.org/10.1007/s10827-014-0540-6)." Journal of Computational Neuroscience 38, no. 2 (2015). See also the [arXiv record](https://arxiv.org/abs/1406.0289).

### Public implementation and context

- Mesmer Prism. "[Bressloff V1 Form Constants Lab](https://github.com/MesmerPrism/bressloff-v1-form-constants)." MIT-licensed Rust and browser implementation used for these generated assets.

- Mesmer Prism. "[Driven Neural Fields Implementation Plan](https://github.com/MesmerPrism/bressloff-v1-form-constants/blob/main/docs/DRIVEN_NEURAL_FIELDS_IMPLEMENTATION_PLAN.md)." Public-safe implementation plan for generated MacKay, Bolelli, and Nicks diagnostics.

- Mesmer Prism. "[Original Author Software Methods](https://github.com/MesmerPrism/bressloff-v1-form-constants/blob/main/docs/ORIGINAL_AUTHOR_SOFTWARE_METHODS.md)." Public-safe provenance note for software and numerical methods named in the source papers.

- BifurcationKit contributors. "[BifurcationKit.jl](https://github.com/bifurcationkit/BifurcationKit.jl)." Public Julia package named in the continuation lineage for the color-hallucination work.

- Mesmer Prism. "[Bressloff V1 Form Constants](https://mesmerprism.com/projects/bressloff-v1-form-constants.html)." Public overview page for the same implementation.

- karacsm. "[V1-sim](https://github.com/karacsm/V1-sim)." Public notebook lineage for V1 activity and retino-cortical visualization.

- CountYourCulture. "[Form Constants and the Visual Cortex](https://isomerdesign.com/countyourculture/2011/03/13/form-constants-visual-cortex/)." Public visual explainer for the form-constant comparison lineage.

- Hewitt et al. "[Stroboscopically Induced Visual Hallucinations: Historical, Phenomenological, and Neurobiological Perspectives](https://doi.org/10.1093/nc/niaf020)." Neuroscience of Consciousness (2025).

- Figure-rights sources. [PLOS licenses and copyright](https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/s/licenses-and-copyright); [Creative Commons Attribution 4.0](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/); [Royal Society permissions](https://royalsociety.org/journals/permissions/); [MIT Press rights and permissions](https://mitpress.mit.edu/rights-permissions/); [Springer Nature rights and permissions](https://www.springernature.com/gp/partners/rights-permissions-third-party-distribution); [IOP permissions FAQ](https://publishingsupport.iopscience.iop.org/permissionsfaq/).
