Back

Euler method can outperform more complex ODE solvers in the numerical implementation of the Izhikevich artificial Spiking Neuron Model given the allocated FLOPS

de Alteriis, G.; Cataldo, E.; Mazzoni, A.; Oddo, C. M.

2021-12-01 bioengineering
10.1101/2021.11.30.470474 bioRxiv
Show abstract

The Izhikevich artificial spiking neuron model is among the most employed models in neuromorphic engineering and computational neuroscience, due to the affordable computational effort to discretize it and its biological plausibility. It has been adopted also for applications with limited computational resources in embedded systems. It is important therefore to realize a compromise between error and computational expense to solve numerically the models equations. Here we investigate the effects of discretization and we study the solver that realizes the best compromise between accuracy and computational cost, given an available amount of Floating Point Operations per Second (FLOPS). We considered three fixed-step solvers for Ordinary Differential Equations (ODE), commonly used in computational neuroscience: Euler method, the Runge-Kutta 2 method and the Runge-Kutta 4 method. To quantify the error produced by the solvers, we used the Victor Purpura spike train Distance from an ideal solution of the ODE. Counterintuitively, we found that simple methods such as Euler and Runge Kutta 2 can outperform more complex ones (i.e. Runge Kutta 4) in the numerical solution of the Izhikevich model if the same FLOPS are allocated in the comparison. Moreover, we quantified the neuron rest time (with input under threshold resulting in no output spikes) necessary for the numerical solution to converge to the ideal solution and therefore to cancel the error accumulated during the spike train; in this analysis we found that the required rest time is independent from the firing rate and the spike train duration. Our results can generalize in a straightforward manner to other spiking neuron models and provide a systematic analysis of fixed step neural ODE solvers towards an accuracy-computational cost tradeoff.

Matching journals

The top 11 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
International Journal for Numerical Methods in Biomedical Engineering
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.4%
2
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 23%
7.4%
3
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 22%
5.0%
4
Journal of Computational Neuroscience
23 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.3%
5
IFAC-PapersOnLine
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.1%
6
Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
53 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
4.1%
7
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 8%
4.1%
8
Journal of Neural Engineering
197 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
3.2%
9
Neurocomputing
13 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.7%
10
Frontiers in Neuroscience
223 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.7%
11
Computers in Biology and Medicine
120 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.1%
50% of probability mass above
12
Journal of Theoretical Biology
144 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
2.1%
13
Biological Cybernetics
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.1%
14
Chaos, Solitons & Fractals
32 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
2.1%
15
Neural Computation
36 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.9%
16
Royal Society Open Science
193 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.9%
17
Bulletin of Mathematical Biology
84 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
18
Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
88 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.5%
19
Mathematical Biosciences
42 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.3%
20
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 10%
1.3%
21
F1000Research
79 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.3%
22
Neuroinformatics
40 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.3%
23
Annals of Biomedical Engineering
34 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.0%
24
IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering
40 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.0%
25
Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine
27 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.0%
26
Journal of Biomechanical Engineering
17 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.9%
27
Journal of Mathematical Biology
37 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.9%
28
Biomechanics and Modeling in Mechanobiology
25 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.9%
29
Biosystems
18 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.9%
30
Frontiers in Physiology
93 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.9%