ArticleCognitive neurodynamics2021
Application of expert system and LSTM in extracting index of synaptic plasticity.
Article in Cognitive neurodynamics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The indexes of synaptic plasticity, including long-term potentiation (LTP) and long-term depression (LTD), can usually be measured by evaluating the slope and/or magnitude of field excitatory postsynaptic potentials (fEPSPs). So far, the process depends on manually labeling the linear portion of fEPSPs one by one, which is not only a subjective procedure but also a time-consuming job. In the present study, a novel approach has been developed in order to objectively and effectively evaluate the index of synaptic plasticity. Firstly, we introduced an expert system applying symbolic rules to discard the contaminated waveform in an interpretable way, and further generate supervisory signals for subsequent seq 2seq model based on neural networks. For the propose of enhancing the system generalization ability to deal with the contaminated data of fEPSPs, we employed long short-term memory (LSTM) networks. Finally, the comparison was performed between the automatically labeling system and manually labeling system. These results show that the expert system achieves an accuracy of 96.22% on Type-I labels, and the LSTM supervised by the expert system obtains an accuracy of 96.73% on Type-II labels. Compared to the manually labeling system, the hybrids system is able to measure the index of synaptic plasticity more objectively and efficiently. The new system can reach the level of the human expert ability, and accurately produce the index of synaptic plasticity in a fast way.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.