Talk:Spike-triggered average

Physiology Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physiology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physiology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysiologyWikipedia:WikiProject PhysiologyTemplate:WikiProject PhysiologyPhysiology articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
	This article has been classified as relating to the physiology of the brain, nerves and nervous system.

Neuroscience High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Neuroscience, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Neuroscience on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.NeuroscienceWikipedia:WikiProject NeuroscienceTemplate:WikiProject Neuroscienceneuroscience articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Medicine Low‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Still a stub?

Is article still as stub? I've been BOLD on other pages, but this seems to still be mostly a lot of technical info. How do the articles get reassessed?Keepstherainoff (talk) 15:30, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Illustration

Here is a new 3D illustration diagram for STA. It might be clearer than the actual version for a broad audience that is not familiar with the manipulation of dimensions. I can also modify it.

StphTphsn (talk) 07:09, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No answer yet. I am going to replace the current version with this one to get more feedback.

StphTphsn (talk) 16:41, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nice. This is figure is better, thanks for taking the initiative to improve it. --JonathanWilliford (talk) 21:38, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]