MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2035555225 · doi:10.1186/1471-2202-13-s1-p96

Optimal neural coding in networks of heterogeneous neurons

2012· article· en· W2035555225 on OpenAlexaff
Jorge F. Mejías, André Longtin

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Neuroscience · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsGeneral Dynamics (Canada)University of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeural codingComputer scienceArtificial neural networkNeuroscienceCoding (social sciences)Information processingPopulationBiological neural networkSynchronization (alternating current)Network dynamicsArtificial intelligenceBiologyMachine learningTelecommunicationsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Neural systems display a prominent level of heterogeneity in synaptic, neuron, and network properties. Even among same-class neurons, differences in excitability properties, for instance, may be present in the system, and this could have strong implications for information processing. A well-known example is the so called population coding ,a strategy which relies on the particular responses of individual neurons of a network to code information. This occurs for instance in V1 cortical networks, where the orientation preference of neurons allows for efficient information coding [1]. However, not many studies have addressed the role of neural heterogeneity in other neural coding strategies. Interestingly, cell-to-cell differences have been recently found to be relevant in synchronization of inhibitory networks [2], coherent activity in electrically coupled neurons [3], synchronized bursting events [4], global detection of weak signals [5], and efficient coding for communication signals [6], highlighting a possible role of heterogeneity on neural information processing. Still, neither the effect of heterogeneity on the dynamics of neural populations nor its influence on neural coding are yet fully understood. In this work, we present a theoretical and numerical study of how different strategies of neural coding (concretely, rate coding and temporal coding) are affected by the presence of heterogeneity in the properties of the neurons in the network, paying special attention to their ability to process and codify incoming signals. We carry out this study in two different systems: the first one, which is conceptually simpler, is a fully-connected network of excitatory integrate-and-fire neurons with small synaptic delays. The second one is more realistic, and consists in a sparsely connected network of excitatory and inhibitory integrateand-fire neurons with small synaptic delays. For both systems, a certain level of heterogeneity is introduced in the neuron firing thresholds, that is, each neuron in the network has a particular degree of excitability. Our aim is to investigate the effect of such heterogeneity level in the strategies used by the network to process and codify neural signals. Our results show that neural heterogeneity has important effects in several properties of interest in neural networks, such as the mean firing rate or the synchronization properties of the network. Then, we find that these effects have strong consequences for two main information processing strategies used in many brain areas: rate coding and temporal coding. More precisely, we show, theoretically and numerically, that certain heterogeneity valueswhich lie within the physiological rage found in actual neurons- optimize the transmission of information in rate and temporal codes in a stochastic resonance fashion, suggesting that cell-to-cell differences are not useful only for population coding, but also for more general coding strategies. Interestingly, we find that networks of heterogeneous neurons tend to behave differently to input changes (such as increments in input rate) depending on the neural coding strategy they are operating in. Such finding suggests the existence of heterogeneity-induced features which are specific for each neural coding strategy.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.762
Threshold uncertainty score0.679

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC NeuroscienceSame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207