↓ Skip to main content

Signal Processing in Periodically Forced Gradient Frequency Neural Networks

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

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
49 Mendeley
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
Signal Processing in Periodically Forced Gradient Frequency Neural Networks
Published in
Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience, December 2015
DOI 10.3389/fncom.2015.00152
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ji Chul Kim, Edward W. Large

Abstract

Oscillatory instability at the Hopf bifurcation is a dynamical phenomenon that has been suggested to characterize active non-linear processes observed in the auditory system. Networks of oscillators poised near Hopf bifurcation points and tuned to tonotopically distributed frequencies have been used as models of auditory processing at various levels, but systematic investigation of the dynamical properties of such oscillatory networks is still lacking. Here we provide a dynamical systems analysis of a canonical model for gradient frequency neural networks driven by a periodic signal. We use linear stability analysis to identify various driven behaviors of canonical oscillators for all possible ranges of model and forcing parameters. The analysis shows that canonical oscillators exhibit qualitatively different sets of driven states and transitions for different regimes of model parameters. We classify the parameter regimes into four main categories based on their distinct signal processing capabilities. This analysis will lead to deeper understanding of the diverse behaviors of neural systems under periodic forcing and can inform the design of oscillatory network models of auditory signal processing.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Poland 1 2%
France 1 2%
Unknown 46 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 24%
Researcher 8 16%
Student > Master 7 14%
Student > Bachelor 3 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Other 7 14%
Unknown 9 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 14 29%
Psychology 8 16%
Engineering 4 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 6%
Arts and Humanities 3 6%
Other 8 16%
Unknown 9 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 25 December 2015.
All research outputs
#15,177,363
of 23,342,092 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
#774
of 1,373 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#219,921
of 393,195 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
#13
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,342,092 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,373 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 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 393,195 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.