Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36251693›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2022

Optimal noise level for coding with tightly balanced networks of spiking neurons in the presence of transmission delays.

Jonathan Timcheck, Jonathan Kadmon, Kwabena Boahen, Surya Ganguli

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Design principles for cost functions in optimal sensory coding.Frontiers in computational neuroscience · 2026
    Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Signatures of criticality in efficient coding networks.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Establishing brain states in neuroimaging data.PLoS computational biology · 2023
    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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jonathan TimcheckDepartment of Physics, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-2071-2668
Jonathan KadmonDepartment of Applied Physics, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America.
Kwabena BoahenDepartment of Bioengineering, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America.
Surya GanguliDepartment of Applied Physics, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-9264-7551
Stanford University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Neural circuits consist of many noisy, slow components, with individual neurons subject to ion channel noise, axonal propagation delays, and unreliable and slow synaptic transmission. This raises a fundamental question: how can reliable computation emerge from such unreliable components? A classic strategy is to simply average over a population of N weakly-coupled neurons to achieve errors that scale as [Formula: see text]. But more interestingly, recent work has introduced networks of leaky integrate-and-fire (LIF) neurons that achieve coding errors that scale superclassically as 1/N by combining the principles of predictive coding and fast and tight inhibitory-excitatory balance. However, spike transmission delays preclude such fast inhibition, and computational studies have observed that such delays can cause pathological synchronization that in turn destroys superclassical coding performance. Intriguingly, it has also been observed in simulations that noise can actually improve coding performance, and that there exists some optimal level of noise that minimizes coding error. However, we lack a quantitative theory that describes this fascinating interplay between delays, noise and neural coding performance in spiking networks. In this work, we elucidate the mechanisms underpinning this beneficial role of noise by deriving analytical expressions for coding error as a function of spike propagation delay and noise levels in predictive coding tight-balance networks of LIF neurons. Furthermore, we compute the minimal coding error and the associated optimal noise level, finding that they grow as power-laws with the delay. Our analysis reveals quantitatively how optimal levels of noise can rescue neural coding performance in spiking neural networks with delays by preventing the build up of pathological synchrony without overwhelming the overall spiking dynamics. This analysis can serve as a foundation for the further study of precise computation in the presence of noise and delays in efficient spiking neural circuits.

Indexed as

Models, NeurologicalNerve NetAction PotentialsNeural Networks, ComputerNeuronsSynaptic Transmission

Identifiers

PMID36251693
PMCPMC9576105
OpenAlexW4306632286

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.