ArticleFrontiers in computational neuroscience2023
Biophysical parameters control signal transfer in spiking network.
Article in Frontiers in computational neuroscience, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Information transmission and representation in both natural and artificial networks is dependent on connectivity between units. Biological neurons, in addition, modulate synaptic dynamics and post-synaptic membrane properties, but how these relate to information transmission in a population of neurons is still poorly understood. A recent study investigated local learning rules and showed how a spiking neural network can learn to represent continuous signals. Our study builds on their model to explore how basic membrane properties and synaptic delays affect information transfer. Methods: The system consisted of three input and output units and a hidden layer of 300 excitatory and 75 inhibitory leaky integrate-and-fire (LIF) or adaptive integrate-and-fire (AdEx) units. After optimizing the connectivity to accurately replicate the input patterns in the output units, we transformed the model to more biologically accurate units and included synaptic delay and concurrent action potential generation in distinct neurons. We examined three different parameter regimes which comprised either identical physiological values for both excitatory and inhibitory units (Comrade), more biologically accurate values (Bacon), or the Comrade regime whose output units were optimized for low reconstruction error (HiFi). We evaluated information transmission and classification accuracy of the network with four distinct metrics: coherence, Granger causality, transfer entropy, and reconstruction error. Results: Biophysical parameters showed a major impact on information transfer metrics. The classification was surprisingly robust, surviving very low firing and information rates, whereas information transmission overall and particularly low reconstruction error were more dependent on higher firing rates in LIF units. In AdEx units, the firing rates were lower and less information was transferred, but interestingly the highest information transmission rates were no longer overlapping with the highest firing rates. Discussion: Our findings can be reflected on the predictive coding theory of the cerebral cortex and may suggest information transfer qualities as a phenomenological quality of biological cells.
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.