MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2161357031 · doi:10.3389/neuro.11.007.2009

Python scripting in the Nengo simulator

2009· article· en· W2161357031 on OpenAlexaff
Terrence C. Stewart

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Neuroinformatics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Memory and Neural Computing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPython (programming language)Computer scienceScripting languageJavaSpiking neural networkGraphical user interfaceArtificial neural networkPopulationNeural codingArtificial intelligenceMachine learningProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nengo (http://nengo.ca) is an open-source neural simulator that has been greatly enhanced by the recent addition of a Python script interface. Nengo provides a wide range of features that are useful for physiological simulations, including unique features that facilitate development of population-coding models using the neural engineering framework (NEF). This framework uses information theory, signal processing, and control theory to formalize the development of large-scale neural circuit models. Notably, it can also be used to determine the synaptic weights that underlie observed network dynamics and transformations of represented variables. Nengo provides rich NEF support, and includes customizable models of spike generation, muscle dynamics, synaptic plasticity, and synaptic integration, as well as an intuitive graphical user interface. All aspects of Nengo models are accessible via the Python interface, allowing for programmatic creation of models, inspection and modification of neural parameters, and automation of model evaluation. Since Nengo combines Python and Java, it can also be integrated with any existing Java or 100% Python code libraries. Current work includes connecting neural models in Nengo with existing symbolic cognitive models, creating hybrid systems that combine detailed neural models of specific brain regions with higher-level models of remaining brain areas. Such hybrid models can provide (1) more realistic boundary conditions for the neural components, and (2) more realistic sub-components for the larger cognitive models.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Software · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.092

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0280.006

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreSoftware

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

Citations53
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in NeuroinformaticsSame topicAdvanced Memory and Neural ComputingFrench-language works237,207