Back

Spiking Recurrent Networks as a Model to Probe Neuronal Timescales Specific to Working Memory

Kim, R.; Sejnowski, T. J.

2019-11-15 neuroscience
10.1101/842302 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Cortical neurons process and integrate information on multiple timescales. In addition, these timescales or temporal receptive fields display functional and hierarchical organization. For instance, areas important for working memory (WM), such as prefrontal cortex, utilize neurons with stable temporal receptive fields and long timescales to support reliable representations of stimuli. Despite of the recent advances in experimental techniques, the underlying mechanisms for the emergence of neuronal timescales long enough to support WM are unclear and challenging to investigate experimentally. Here, we demonstrate that spiking recurrent neural networks (RNNs) designed to perform a WM task reproduce previously observed experimental findings and that these models could be utilized in the future to study how neuronal timescales specific to WM emerge.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS Computational Biology
● 1863 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
37.8%
Similar papers in this journal
2
Cerebral Cortex
◐ 396 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
6.0%
Similar papers in this journal
3
Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
○ 60 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
5.2%
Similar papers in this journal
4
Neural Computation
● 39 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
5.2%
Similar papers in this journal
50% of probability mass above
5
Cognitive Neurodynamics
○ 18 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.1%
Similar papers in this journal
6
Neural Networks
○ 35 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.9%
7
Neurocomputing
○ 13 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.9%
8
Scientific Reports
○ 3612 papers in training set
Top 27%
3.9%
9
PLOS ONE
● 5266 papers in training set
Top 39%
2.6%
10
Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience
○ 22 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.0%
11
eLife
● 5828 papers in training set
Top 49%
1.8%
12
iScience
○ 1154 papers in training set
Top 20%
1.7%
13
Frontiers in Neuroscience
○ 256 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.6%
14
Journal of Neurophysiology
● 302 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.4%
15
Communications Biology
○ 993 papers in training set
Top 18%
1.4%
16
eneuro
● 439 papers in training set
Top 6%
1.1%
17
Journal of Neural Engineering
○ 221 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
18
Neuroinformatics
○ 46 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.1%
19
Cell Reports
○ 1498 papers in training set
Top 25%
1.0%
20
Neuroscience
○ 97 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
21
Network Neuroscience
● 126 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
22
Progress in Neurobiology
○ 47 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
23
Neuroscience Letters
○ 32 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.6%

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.