Time Step Impact on Performance and Accuracy of Izhikevich Neuron: Software Simulation and Hardware Implementation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Spiking neurons, the models that mimic the biological cells in the brain, are described using ordinary differential equations. A common method to numerically solve these equations is Euler's method. An important factor that has a significant impact on the performance and cost of the hardware implementation or software simulation of spiking neural networks and yet its importance has been neglected in the published literature, is the time step in Euler's method. In this paper, first the Izhikevich neuron's accuracy as a function of the time step was measured. It was uncovered that the threshold time step that Izhikevich neuron becomes unstable is an exponential function of the input current. Software simulation performance, including total computational time and memory usage were compared for different time steps. Afterwards, the model was synthesized and implemented on the Filed Programmable Gate Array (FPGA). Hardware performance metrics such as speed, area and power consumption were measured for each time step. Results indicated that time step has a negative linear effect on the performance. It was concluded that by determining maximum input current to the neuron, larger time steps comparable to those used in the previous works could be employed.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".