ArticleFrontiers in neuroinformatics2022
Black-box and surrogate optimization for tuning spiking neural models of striatum plasticity.
Article in Frontiers in neuroinformatics, 2022. 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 basal ganglia (BG) is a brain structure that has long been proposed to play an essential role in action selection, and theoretical models of spiking neurons have tried to explain how the BG solves this problem. A recently proposed functional and biologically inspired network model of the striatum (an important nucleus of the BG) is based on spike-timing-dependent eligibility (STDE) and captured important experimental features of this nucleus. The model can recognize complex input patterns and consistently choose rewarded actions to respond to such sensory inputs. However, model tuning is challenging due to two main reasons. The first is the expert knowledge required, resulting in tedious and potentially biased trial-and-error procedures. The second is the computational cost of assessing model configurations (approximately 1.78 h per evaluation). This study addresses the model tuning problem through numerical optimization. Considering the cost of assessing solutions, the selected methods stand out due to their low requirements for solution evaluations and compatibility with high-performance computing. They are the SurrogateOpt solver of Matlab and the RBFOpt library, both based on radial basis function approximations, and DIRECT-GL, an enhanced version of the widespread black-box optimizer DIRECT. Besides, a parallel random search serves as a baseline reference of the outcome of opting for sophisticated methods. SurrogateOpt turns out to be the best option for tuning this kind of model. It outperforms, on average, the quality of the configuration found by an expert and works significantly faster and autonomously. RBFOpt and the random search share the second position, but their average results are below the option found by hand. Finally, DIRECT-GL follows this line becoming the worst-performing method.
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.