↓ Skip to main content

Dynamic Neural Fields with Intrinsic Plasticity

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
40 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
Dynamic Neural Fields with Intrinsic Plasticity
Published in
Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience, August 2017
DOI 10.3389/fncom.2017.00074
Pubmed ID
Authors

Claudius Strub, Gregor Schöner, Florentin Wörgötter, Yulia Sandamirskaya

Abstract

Dynamic neural fields (DNFs) are dynamical systems models that approximate the activity of large, homogeneous, and recurrently connected neural networks based on a mean field approach. Within dynamic field theory, the DNFs have been used as building blocks in architectures to model sensorimotor embedding of cognitive processes. Typically, the parameters of a DNF in an architecture are manually tuned in order to achieve a specific dynamic behavior (e.g., decision making, selection, or working memory) for a given input pattern. This manual parameters search requires expert knowledge and time to find and verify a suited set of parameters. The DNF parametrization may be particular challenging if the input distribution is not known in advance, e.g., when processing sensory information. In this paper, we propose the autonomous adaptation of the DNF resting level and gain by a learning mechanism of intrinsic plasticity (IP). To enable this adaptation, an input and output measure for the DNF are introduced, together with a hyper parameter to define the desired output distribution. The online adaptation by IP gives the possibility to pre-define the DNF output statistics without knowledge of the input distribution and thus, also to compensate for changes in it. The capabilities and limitations of this approach are evaluated in a number of experiments.

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.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 40 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 20%
Researcher 8 20%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 8%
Student > Master 3 8%
Student > Bachelor 2 5%
Other 8 20%
Unknown 8 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 5 13%
Psychology 5 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 10%
Physics and Astronomy 3 8%
Computer Science 3 8%
Other 9 23%
Unknown 11 28%
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 27 March 2018.
All research outputs
#16,543,473
of 24,340,143 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
#900
of 1,412 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#204,236
of 320,129 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
#26
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,340,143 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 1,412 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 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 320,129 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.