Estimating Excitatory and Inhibitory Synaptic Conductances from Spike Trains using a Recursive Bayesian Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Inference of excitatory and inhibitory synaptic conductances (SCs) from the spike trains is poorly addressed in the literature due to the complexity of the problem. As recent technological advancements make recording spikes from multiple (neighbor) neurons of a behaving animal (in some rare cases from humans) possible, this paper tackles the problem of estimating SCs solely from the recorded spike trains. Given an ensemble of spikes corresponding to population of neighbor neurons, we aim to infer the average excitatory and inhibitory SCs underlying the shared neural activity. In this paper, we extended our previously established Kalman filtering (KF)–based algorithm to incorporate the voltage-to-spike nonlinearity (mapping from membrane potential to spike rate). Having estimated the instantaneous spike rate using optimal linear filtering (Gaussian kernel), our proposed algorithm uses KF followed by expectation maximization (EM) algorithm in a recursive fashion to infer the average SCs. As the dynamics of SCs and membrane potential is included in our model, the proposed algorithm, unlike other related works, considers different sources of stochasticity, i.e., the variabilities of SCs, membrane potential, and spikes. Moreover, it is worth mentioning that our algorithm is blind to the external stimulus, and it performs only based on observed spikes. We validate the accuracy and practicality of our technique through simulation studies where leaky integrate and fire (LIF) model is used to generate spikes. We show that the estimated SCs can precisely track the original ones. Moreover, we show that the performance of our algorithm can be further improved given enough number of trials (spikes). As a rule of thumb, 50 trials of neurons with the average firing rate of 5 Hz can guarantee the accuracy of our proposed algorithm.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".