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

The Trouble with Weight-Dependent STDP

2007· article· en· W1973661972 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.369
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.000
Research integrity0.0000.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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