Any modeler who has attempted to reproduce a spiking neural network model from its description in a paper has discovered what a painful endeavor this is. Even when all parameters appear to have been specified, which is rare, typically the initial attempt to reproduce the network does not yield results that are recognizably akin to those in the original publication. Causes include inaccurately reported or hidden parameters (e.g., wrong unit or the existence of an initialization distribution), differences in implementation of model dynamics, and ambiguities in the text description of the network experiment. The very fact that adequate reproduction often cannot be achieved until a series of such causes have been tracked down and resolved is in itself disconcerting, as it reveals unreported model dependencies on specific implementation choices that either were not clear to the original authors, or that they chose not to disclose. In either case, such dependencies diminish the credibility of the model's claims about the behavior of the target system. To demonstrate these issues, we provide a worked example of reproducing a seminal study for which, unusually, source code was provided at time of publication. Despite this seemingly optimal starting position, reproducing the results was time consuming and frustrating. Further examination of the correctly reproduced model reveals that it is highly sensitive to implementation choices such as the realization of background noise, the integration timestep, and the thresholding parameter of the analysis algorithm. From this process, we derive a guideline of best practices that would substantially reduce the investment in reproducing neural network studies, whilst simultaneously increasing their scientific quality. We propose that this guideline can be used by authors and reviewers to assess and improve the reproducibility of future network models.

In order to properly assess the function and computational properties of simulated neural systems, it is necessary to account for the nature of the stimuli that drive the system. However, providing stimuli that are rich and yet both reproducible and amenable to experimental manipulations is technically challenging, and even more so if a closed-loop scenario is required. In this work, we present a novel approach to solve this problem, connecting robotics and neural network simulators. We implement a middleware solution that bridges the Robotic Operating System (ROS) to the Multi-Simulator Coordinator (MUSIC). This enables any robotic and neural simulators that implement the corresponding interfaces to be efficiently coupled, allowing real-time performance for a wide range of configurations. This work extends the toolset available for researchers in both neurorobotics and computational neuroscience, and creates the opportunity to perform closed-loop experiments of arbitrary complexity to address questions in multiple areas, including embodiment, agency, and reinforcement learning.

Table of contentsA1 Functional advantages of cell-type heterogeneity in neural circuitsTatyana O. SharpeeA2 Mesoscopic modeling of propagating waves in visual cortexAlain DestexheA3 Dynamics and biomarkers of mental disordersMitsuo KawatoF1 Precise recruitment of spiking output at theta frequencies requires dendritic h-channels in multi-compartment models of oriens-lacunosum/moleculare hippocampal interneuronsVladislav Sekulić, Frances K. SkinnerF2 Kernel methods in reconstruction of current sources from extracellular potentials for single cells and the whole brainsDaniel K. Wójcik, Chaitanya Chintaluri, Dorottya Cserpán, Zoltán SomogyváriF3 The synchronized periods depend on intracellular transcriptional repression mechanisms in circadian clocks.Jae Kyoung Kim, Zachary P. Kilpatrick, Matthew R. Bennett, Kresimir JosićO1 Assessing irregularity and coordination of spiking-bursting rhythms in central pattern generatorsIrene Elices, David Arroyo, Rafael Levi, Francisco B. Rodriguez, Pablo VaronaO2 Regulation of top-down processing by cortically-projecting parvalbumin positive neurons in basal forebrainEunjin Hwang, Bowon Kim, Hio-Been Han, Tae Kim, James T. McKenna, Ritchie E. Brown, Robert W. McCarley, Jee Hyun ChoiO3 Modeling auditory stream segregation, build-up and bistabilityJames Rankin, Pamela Osborn Popp, John RinzelO4 Strong competition between tonotopic neural ensembles explains pitch-related dynamics of auditory cortex evoked fieldsAlejandro Tabas, André Rupp, Emili Balaguer-BallesterO5 A simple model of retinal response to multi-electrode stimulationMatias I. Maturana, David B. Grayden, Shaun L. Cloherty, Tatiana Kameneva, Michael R. Ibbotson, Hamish MeffinO6 Noise correlations in V4 area correlate with behavioral performance in visual discrimination taskVeronika Koren, Timm Lochmann, Valentin Dragoi, Klaus ObermayerO7 Input-location dependent gain modulation in cerebellar nucleus neuronsMaria Psarrou, Maria Schilstra, Neil Davey, Benjamin Torben-Nielsen, Volker SteuberO8 Analytic solution of cable energy function for cortical axons and dendritesHuiwen Ju, Jiao Yu, Michael L. Hines, Liang Chen, Yuguo YuO9 C. elegans interactome: interactive visualization of Caenorhabditis elegans worm neuronal networkJimin Kim, Will Leahy, Eli ShlizermanO10 Is the model any good? Objective criteria for computational neuroscience model selectionJustas Birgiolas, Richard C. Gerkin, Sharon M. CrookO11 Cooperation and competition of gamma oscillation mechanismsAtthaphon Viriyopase, Raoul-Martin Memmesheimer, Stan GielenO12 A discrete structure of the brain wavesYuri Dabaghian, Justin DeVito, Luca PerottiO13 Direction-specific silencing of the Drosophila gaze stabilization systemAnmo J. Kim, Lisa M. Fenk, Cheng Lyu, Gaby MaimonO14 What does the fruit fly think about values? A model of olfactory associative learningChang Zhao, Yves Widmer, Simon Sprecher,Walter SennO15 Effects of ionic diffusion on power spectra of local field potentials (LFP)Geir Halnes, Tuomo Mäki-Marttunen, Daniel Keller, Klas H. Pettersen,Ole A. Andreassen...

Reinforcement learning is a paradigm that can account for how organisms learn to adapt their behavior in complex environments with sparse rewards. To partition an environment into discrete states, implementations in spiking neuronal networks typically rely on input architectures involving place cells or receptive fields specified ad hoc by the researcher. This is problematic as a model for how an organism can learn appropriate behavioral sequences in unknown environments, as it fails to account for the unsupervised and self-organized nature of the required representations. Additionally, this approach presupposes knowledge on the part of the researcher on how the environment should be partitioned and represented and scales poorly with the size or complexity of the environment. To address these issues and gain insights into how the brain generates its own task-relevant mappings, we propose a learning architecture that combines unsupervised learning on the input projections with biologically motivated clustered connectivity within the representation layer. This combination allows input features to be mapped to clusters; thus the network self-organizes to produce clearly distinguishable activity patterns that can serve as the basis for reinforcement learning on the output projections. On the basis of the MNIST and Mountain Car tasks, we show that our proposed model performs better than either a comparable unclustered network or a clustered network with static input projections. We conclude that the combination of unsupervised learning and clustered connectivity provides a generic representational substrate suitable for further computation.