Role of short-term plasticity and slow temporal dynamics in enhancing time series prediction with a brain-inspired recurrent neural network
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Typical reservoir networks are based on random connectivity patterns that differ from brain circuits in two important ways. First, traditional reservoir networks lack synaptic plasticity among recurrent units, whereas cortical networks exhibit plasticity across all neuronal types and cortical layers. Second, reservoir networks utilize random Gaussian connectivity, while cortical networks feature a heavy-tailed distribution of synaptic strengths. It is unclear what are the computational advantages of these features for predicting complex time series. In this study, we integrated short-term plasticity (STP) and lognormal connectivity into a novel recurrent neural network (RNN) framework. The model exhibited rich patterns of population activity characterized by slow coordinated fluctuations. Using graph spectral decomposition, we show that weighted networks with lognormal connectivity and STP yield higher complexity than several graph types. When tested on various tasks involving the prediction of complex time series data, the RNN model outperformed a baseline model with random connectivity as well as several other network architectures. Overall, our results underscore the potential of incorporating brain-inspired features such as STP and heavy-tailed connectivity to enhance the robustness and performance of artificial neural networks in complex data prediction and signal processing tasks.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".