Advertisement

Stability of point process spiking neuron models

  • Yu Chen
  • Qi Xin
  • Valérie Ventura
  • Robert E. Kass
Article
  • 44 Downloads

Abstract

Point process regression models, based on generalized linear model (GLM) technology, have been widely used for spike train analysis, but a recent paper by Gerhard et al. described a kind of instability, in which fitted models can generate simulated spike trains with explosive firing rates. We analyze the problem by extending the methods of Gerhard et al. First, we improve their instability diagnostic and extend it to a wider class of models. Next, we point out some common situations in which instability can be traced to model lack of fit. Finally, we investigate distinctions between models that use a single filter to represent the effects of all spikes prior to any particular time t, as in a 2008 paper by Pillow et al., and those that allow different filters for each spike prior to time t, as in a 2001 paper by Kass and Ventura. We re-analyze the data sets used by Gerhard et al., introduce an additional data set that exhibits bursting, and use a well-known model described by Izhikevich to simulate spike trains from various ground truth scenarios. We conclude that models with multiple filters tend to avoid instability, but there are unlikely to be universal rules. Instead, care in data fitting is required and models need to be assessed for each unique set of data.

Keywords

Generalized linear model Outlier trials Point process regression Spike train 

Notes

Acknowledgments

Yu Chen and Robert E. Kass were supported by NIH grant OT2OD023859.

Robert E. Kass and Valérie Ventura were supported by NIH grant R01 MH064537.

Robert E. Kass was also supported, in part, by NSF grant IIS-1430208.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

References

  1. Brown, E. N., Barbieri, R., Ventura, V., Kass, R. E., Frank, L. M. (2002). The time-rescaling theorem and its application to neural spike train data analysis. Neural Computation, 14(2), 325–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Chen, S., Shojaie, A., Shea-Brown, E., Witten, D. (2017). The multivariate hawkes process in high dimensions: Beyond mutual excitation. arXiv:170704928.
  3. Eichler, M., Dahlhaus, R., Dueck, J. (2017). Graphical modeling for multivariate hawkes processes with nonparametric link functions. Journal of Time Series Analysis, 38(2), 225–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Gerhard, F., Deger, M., Truccolo, W. (2017). On the stability and dynamics of stochastic spiking neuron models: Nonlinear hawkes process and point process glms. PLoS Computational Biology, 13(2), e1005,390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Haslinger, R., Pipa, G., Brown, E. (2010). Discrete time rescaling theorem: determining goodness of fit for discrete time statistical models of neural spiking. Neural Computation, 22(10), 2477–2506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Izhikevich, E. M. (2003). Simple model of spiking neurons. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks, 14(6), 1569–1572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Izhikevich, E. M. (2004). Which model to use for cortical spiking neurons? IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks, 15(5), 1063–1070.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Kass, R. E., & Ventura, V. (2001). A spike-train probability model. Neural Computation, 13(8), 1713–1720.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kass, R. E., Eden, U. T., Brown, E. N. (2014). Analysis of neural data Vol. 491. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Levine, M. W. (1991). The distribution of the intervals between neural impulses in the maintained discharges of retinal ganglion cells. Biological Cybernetics, 65(6), 459–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Pillow, J. W., Shlens, J., Paninski, L., Sher, A., Litke, A. M., Chichilnisky, E., Simoncelli, E. P. (2008). Spatio-temporal correlations and visual signalling in a complete neuronal population. Nature, 454(7207), 995–999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Tokdar, S., Xi, P., Kelly, R. C., Kass, R. E. (2010). Detection of bursts in extracellular spike trains using hidden semi-markov point process models. Journal of Computational Neuroscience, 29(1-2), 203–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ventura, V., Cai, C., Kass, R. E. (2005). Trial-to-trial variability and its effect on time-varying dependency between two neurons. Journal of Neurophysiology, 94(4), 2928–2939.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Weber, A.I., & Pillow, J.W. (2017). Capturing the dynamical repertoire of single neurons with generalized linear models. Neural Computation.Google Scholar
  15. Wu, W., & Srivastava, A. (2011). An information-geometric framework for statistical inferences in the neural spike train space. Journal of Computational Neuroscience, 31(3), 725–748.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Carnegie Mellon UniversityPittsburghUSA
  2. 2.University of Science and Technology of ChinaHefeiChina

Personalised recommendations