Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37077894›Full record

ArticleMethodsX2023

Models developed for spiking neural networks.

Shahriar Rezghi Shirsavar, Abdol-Hossein Vahabie, Mohammad-Reza A Dehaqani

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in MethodsX, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

3 authors.

Shahriar Rezghi ShirsavarSchool of Electrical and Computer Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.
Abdol-Hossein VahabieSchool of Electrical and Computer Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.
Mohammad-Reza A DehaqaniSchool of Electrical and Computer Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Emergence of deep neural networks (DNNs) has raised enormous attention towards artificial neural networks (ANNs) once again. They have become the state-of-the-art models and have won different machine learning challenges. Although these networks are inspired by the brain, they lack biological plausibility, and they have structural differences compared to the brain. Spiking neural networks (SNNs) have been around for a long time, and they have been investigated to understand the dynamics of the brain. However, their application in real-world and complicated machine learning tasks were limited. Recently, they have shown great potential in solving such tasks. Due to their energy efficiency and temporal dynamics there are many promises in their future development. In this work, we reviewed the structures and performances of SNNs on image classification tasks. The comparisons illustrate that these networks show great capabilities for more complicated problems. Furthermore, the simple learning rules developed for SNNs, such as STDP and R-STDP, can be a potential alternative to replace the backpropagation algorithm used in DNNs.•Different building blocks of spiking neural networks are explained in this work.•Developed models for SNNs are introduced based on their characteristics and building blocks.

Indexed as

ANN-to-SNNBackpropagationBiological plausibilityLiterature reviewR-STDPSpiking neural networkSTDP

Identifiers

PMID37077894
PMCPMC10106956

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.