↓ Skip to main content

Bayesian Estimation of Phase Dynamics Based on Partially Sampled Spikes Generated by Realistic Model Neurons

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
17 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
Bayesian Estimation of Phase Dynamics Based on Partially Sampled Spikes Generated by Realistic Model Neurons
Published in
Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience, January 2018
DOI 10.3389/fncom.2017.00116
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kento Suzuki, Toshio Aoyagi, Katsunori Kitano

Abstract

A dynamic system showing stable rhythmic activity can be represented by the dynamics of phase oscillators. This would provide a useful mathematical framework through which one can understand the system's dynamic properties. A recent study proposed a Bayesian approach capable of extracting the underlying phase dynamics directly from time-series data of a system showing rhythmic activity. Here we extended this method to spike data that otherwise provide only limited phase information. To determine how this method performs with spike data, we applied it to simulated spike data generated by a realistic neuronal network model. We then compared the estimated dynamics obtained based on the spike data with the dynamics theoretically derived from the model. The method successfully extracted the modeled phase dynamics, particularly the interaction function, when the amount of available data was sufficiently large. Furthermore, the method was able to infer synaptic connections based on the estimated interaction function. Thus, the method was found to be applicable to spike data and practical for understanding the dynamic properties of rhythmic neural systems.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 17 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 24%
Student > Bachelor 3 18%
Researcher 2 12%
Student > Master 2 12%
Professor 1 6%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 5 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 4 24%
Psychology 2 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 6%
Computer Science 1 6%
Physics and Astronomy 1 6%
Other 3 18%
Unknown 5 29%
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 10 January 2018.
All research outputs
#19,283,372
of 23,870,803 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
#1,077
of 1,385 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#337,429
of 446,746 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
#20
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,870,803 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,385 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% 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 446,746 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.