MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2498293822 · doi:10.1017/cbo9781107447615.007

Nonlinear integrate-and-fire models

2014· book-chapter· en· W2498293822 on OpenAlexaff
Wulfram Gerstner, Richard Naud, Liam Paninski

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2014
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceBiological neuron modelNonlinear systemCoding (social sciences)Predictive codingNeural codingArtificial intelligenceArtificial neural networkTheoretical computer scienceBiological systemPhysicsMathematicsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Detailed conductance-based neuron models can reproduce electrophysiological measurements to a high degree of accuracy, but because of their intrinsic complexity these models are difficult to analyze. For this reason, simple phenomenological spiking neuron models are highly popular for studies of neural coding, memory, and network dynamics. In this chapter we discuss formal threshold models of neuronal firing, also called integrate-andfire models. The shape of the action potential of a given neuron is rather stereotyped with very little change between one spike and the next. Thus, the shape of the action potential which travels along the axon to a postsynaptic neuron cannot be used to transmit information; rather, from the point of view of the receiving neuron, action potentials are “events” which are fully characterized by the arrival time of the spike at the synapse. Note that spikes from different neuron types can have different shapes and the duration and shape of the spike does influence neurotransmitter release; but the spikes that arrive at a given synapse all come from the same presynaptic neuron and – if we neglect effects of fatigue of ionic channels in the axon – we can assume that its time course is always the same. Therefore we make no effort to model the exact shape of an action potential. Rather, spikes are treated as events characterized by their firing time – and the task consists in finding a model so as to reliably predict spike timings.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.003

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.165 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations3
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207