MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1973661972 · doi:10.1109/ijcnn.2007.4371154

The Trouble with Weight-Dependent STDP

2007· article· en· W1973661972 on OpenAlexaff
Dominic Standage, Thomas Trappenberg

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE International Conference on Neural Networks/IEEE ... International Conference on Neural Networks · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Memory and Neural Computing
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForgettingComputer scienceSlownessLearning ruleArtificial intelligenceRange (aeronautics)Machine learningArtificial neural networkCognitive psychologyPsychologyEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We fit a weight-dependent STDP rule to the classic data of Bi and Poo (1998), showing that this rule leads to slow learning in a simulation with an integrate-and-fire neuron. The slowness of learning is explained by an inequality between the range of initial weights in the data and the largest relative potentiation. We show that slow learning can be overcome with an increased learning rate, but that this approach leads to rapid forgetting in the presence of realistic levels of background spiking. Our study demonstrates that weight-dependent STDP rules, commonly used in neural simulations, have biologically unrealistic consequences. We discuss the implications of this finding for several interpretations of weight-dependent plasticity and STDP more generally, and recommend directions for further research.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.005
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.049
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.247 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE International Conference on Neural Networks/IEEE ... International Conference on Neural NetworksSame topicAdvanced Memory and Neural ComputingFrench-language works237,207