Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24058276›Full record

ArticleSIAM journal on scientific computing : a publication of the Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics2013

EXPONENTIAL TIME DIFFERENCING FOR HODGKIN-HUXLEY-LIKE ODES.

Christoph Börgers, Alexander R Nectow

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in SIAM journal on scientific computing : a publication of the Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Christoph BörgersDepartment of Mathematics, Tufts University, Medford, MA 02155.
Alexander R Nectow

Funding

CRCNS: Gamma Rhythms and Cell AssembliesR01NS067199 · NINDS · BOSTON UNIVERSITY (CHARLES RIVER CAMPUS) · PI KOPELL, NANCY · 2009 to 2013
$1.7M
NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS067199
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Several authors have proposed the use of exponential time differencing (ETD) for Hodgkin-Huxley-like partial and ordinary differential equations (PDEs and ODEs). For Hodgkin-Huxley-like PDEs, ETD is attractive because it can deal effectively with the stiffness issues that diffusion gives rise to. However, large neuronal networks are often simulated assuming "space-clamped" neurons, i.e., using the Hodgkin-Huxley ODEs, in which there are no diffusion terms. Our goal is to clarify whether ETD is a good idea even in that case. We present a numerical comparison of first- and second-order ETD with standard explicit time-stepping schemes (Euler's method, the midpoint method, and the classical fourth-order Runge-Kutta method). We find that in the standard schemes, the stable computation of the very rapid rising phase of the action potential often forces time steps of a small fraction of a millisecond. This can result in an expensive calculation yielding greater overall accuracy than needed. Although it is tempting at first to try to address this issue with adaptive or fully implicit time-stepping, we argue that neither is effective here. The main advantage of ETD for Hodgkin-Huxley-like systems of ODEs is that it allows underresolution of the rising phase of the action potential without causing instability, using time steps on the order of one millisecond. When high quantitative accuracy is not necessary and perhaps, because of modeling inaccuracies, not even useful, ETD allows much faster simulations than standard explicit time-stepping schemes. The second-order ETD scheme is found to be substantially more accurate than the first-order one even for large values of Δ

Indexed as

computational neuroscienceexponential time differencingHodgkin–Huxley equationsstiffness

Identifiers

PMID24058276
PMCPMC3779145

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.