↓ Skip to main content

Phase diagram of spiking neural networks

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience, March 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (55th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (56th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 Mendeley
citeulike
2 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
Phase diagram of spiking neural networks
Published in
Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience, March 2015
DOI 10.3389/fncom.2015.00019
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hamed Seyed-allaei

Abstract

In computer simulations of spiking neural networks, often it is assumed that every two neurons of the network are connected by a probability of 2%, 20% of neurons are inhibitory and 80% are excitatory. These common values are based on experiments, observations, and trials and errors, but here, I take a different perspective, inspired by evolution, I systematically simulate many networks, each with a different set of parameters, and then I try to figure out what makes the common values desirable. I stimulate networks with pulses and then measure their: dynamic range, dominant frequency of population activities, total duration of activities, maximum rate of population and the occurrence time of maximum rate. The results are organized in phase diagram. This phase diagram gives an insight into the space of parameters - excitatory to inhibitory ratio, sparseness of connections and synaptic weights. This phase diagram can be used to decide the parameters of a model. The phase diagrams show that networks which are configured according to the common values, have a good dynamic range in response to an impulse and their dynamic range is robust in respect to synaptic weights, and for some synaptic weights they oscillates in α or β frequencies, independent of external stimuli.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users 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 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 2%
Italy 1 2%
Vietnam 1 2%
Iran, Islamic Republic of 1 2%
Japan 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Unknown 37 86%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 21%
Student > Master 7 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 7%
Other 7 16%
Unknown 3 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 12 28%
Physics and Astronomy 8 19%
Computer Science 5 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 9%
Mathematics 3 7%
Other 8 19%
Unknown 3 7%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 27 November 2017.
All research outputs
#12,724,906
of 22,794,367 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
#448
of 1,341 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#114,106
of 257,854 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
#13
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,794,367 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,341 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its peers.
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 257,854 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its contemporaries.