Spiking Neural Networks and online learning: An overview and perspectives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Applications that generate huge amounts of data in the form of fast streams are becoming increasingly prevalent, being therefore necessary to learn in an online manner. These conditions usually impose memory and processing time restrictions, and they often turn into evolving environments where a change may affect the input data distribution. Such a change causes that predictive models trained over these stream data become obsolete and do not adapt suitably to new distributions. Specially in these non-stationary scenarios, there is a pressing need for new algorithms that adapt to these changes as fast as possible, while maintaining good performance scores. Unfortunately, most off-the-shelf classification models need to be retrained if they are used in changing environments, and fail to scale properly. Spiking Neural Networks have revealed themselves as one of the most successful approaches to model the behavior and learning potential of the brain, and exploit them to undertake practical online learning tasks. Besides, some specific flavors of Spiking Neural Networks can overcome the necessity of retraining after a drift occurs. This work intends to merge both fields by serving as a comprehensive overview, motivating further developments that embrace Spiking Neural Networks for online learning scenarios, and being a friendly entry point for non-experts.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".