↓ Skip to main content

Serial Spike Time Correlations Affect Probability Distribution of Joint Spike Events

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 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
Serial Spike Time Correlations Affect Probability Distribution of Joint Spike Events
Published in
Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience, December 2016
DOI 10.3389/fncom.2016.00139
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mina Shahi, Carl van Vreeswijk, Gordon Pipa

Abstract

Detecting the existence of temporally coordinated spiking activity, and its role in information processing in the cortex, has remained a major challenge for neuroscience research. Different methods and approaches have been suggested to test whether the observed synchronized events are significantly different from those expected by chance. To analyze the simultaneous spike trains for precise spike correlation, these methods typically model the spike trains as a Poisson process implying that the generation of each spike is independent of all the other spikes. However, studies have shown that neural spike trains exhibit dependence among spike sequences, such as the absolute and relative refractory periods which govern the spike probability of the oncoming action potential based on the time of the last spike, or the bursting behavior, which is characterized by short epochs of rapid action potentials, followed by longer episodes of silence. Here we investigate non-renewal processes with the inter-spike interval distribution model that incorporates spike-history dependence of individual neurons. For that, we use the Monte Carlo method to estimate the full shape of the coincidence count distribution and to generate false positives for coincidence detection. The results show that compared to the distributions based on homogeneous Poisson processes, and also non-Poisson processes, the width of the distribution of joint spike events changes. Non-renewal processes can lead to both heavy tailed or narrow coincidence distribution. We conclude that small differences in the exact autostructure of the point process can cause large differences in the width of a coincidence distribution. Therefore, manipulations of the autostructure for the estimation of significance of joint spike events seem to be inadequate.

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 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 4%
Germany 1 4%
Unknown 26 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 36%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 18%
Lecturer 2 7%
Student > Bachelor 2 7%
Professor 2 7%
Other 3 11%
Unknown 4 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 8 29%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 14%
Computer Science 3 11%
Physics and Astronomy 2 7%
Psychology 1 4%
Other 4 14%
Unknown 6 21%
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 03 January 2017.
All research outputs
#16,452,494
of 24,226,848 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
#895
of 1,406 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#264,607
of 428,439 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
#24
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,226,848 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,406 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 428,439 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.