↓ Skip to main content

Fast convergence of learning requires plasticity between inferior olive and deep cerebellar nuclei in a manipulation task: a closed-loop robotic simulation

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience, August 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
67 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Fast convergence of learning requires plasticity between inferior olive and deep cerebellar nuclei in a manipulation task: a closed-loop robotic simulation
Published in
Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience, August 2014
DOI 10.3389/fncom.2014.00097
Pubmed ID
Authors

Niceto R. Luque, Jesús A. Garrido, Richard R. Carrillo, Egidio D'Angelo, Eduardo Ros

Abstract

The cerebellum is known to play a critical role in learning relevant patterns of activity for adaptive motor control, but the underlying network mechanisms are only partly understood. The classical long-term synaptic plasticity between parallel fibers (PFs) and Purkinje cells (PCs), which is driven by the inferior olive (IO), can only account for limited aspects of learning. Recently, the role of additional forms of plasticity in the granular layer, molecular layer and deep cerebellar nuclei (DCN) has been considered. In particular, learning at DCN synapses allows for generalization, but convergence to a stable state requires hundreds of repetitions. In this paper we have explored the putative role of the IO-DCN connection by endowing it with adaptable weights and exploring its implications in a closed-loop robotic manipulation task. Our results show that IO-DCN plasticity accelerates convergence of learning by up to two orders of magnitude without conflicting with the generalization properties conferred by DCN plasticity. Thus, this model suggests that multiple distributed learning mechanisms provide a key for explaining the complex properties of procedural learning and open up new experimental questions for synaptic plasticity in the cerebellar network.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 67 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 2 3%
Germany 1 1%
Unknown 64 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 18%
Researcher 12 18%
Student > Master 11 16%
Other 6 9%
Student > Bachelor 5 7%
Other 12 18%
Unknown 9 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 11 16%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 13%
Engineering 8 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 10%
Computer Science 6 9%
Other 11 16%
Unknown 15 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 September 2014.
All research outputs
#18,378,085
of 22,763,032 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
#1,052
of 1,339 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#164,500
of 230,681 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
#15
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,763,032 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,339 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 230,681 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.