IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pcbi00/1002432.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Feedforward Inhibition and Synaptic Scaling – Two Sides of the Same Coin?

Author

Listed:
  • Christian Keck
  • Cristina Savin
  • Jörg Lücke

Abstract

Feedforward inhibition and synaptic scaling are important adaptive processes that control the total input a neuron can receive from its afferents. While often studied in isolation, the two have been reported to co-occur in various brain regions. The functional implications of their interactions remain unclear, however. Based on a probabilistic modeling approach, we show here that fast feedforward inhibition and synaptic scaling interact synergistically during unsupervised learning. In technical terms, we model the input to a neural circuit using a normalized mixture model with Poisson noise. We demonstrate analytically and numerically that, in the presence of lateral inhibition introducing competition between different neurons, Hebbian plasticity and synaptic scaling approximate the optimal maximum likelihood solutions for this model. Our results suggest that, beyond its conventional use as a mechanism to remove undesired pattern variations, input normalization can make typical neural interaction and learning rules optimal on the stimulus subspace defined through feedforward inhibition. Furthermore, learning within this subspace is more efficient in practice, as it helps avoid locally optimal solutions. Our results suggest a close connection between feedforward inhibition and synaptic scaling which may have important functional implications for general cortical processing. Author Summary: The inputs a neuron receives from its presynaptic partners strongly fluctuate as a result of either varying sensory information or ongoing intrinsic activity. To represent this wide range of signals effectively, neurons use various mechanisms that regulate the total input they receive. On the one hand, feedforward inhibition adjusts the relative contribution of individual inputs inversely proportional to the total number of active afferents, implementing a form of input normalization. On the other hand, synaptic scaling uniformly rescales the efficacy of incoming synapses to stabilize the neuron's firing rate after learning-induced changes in drive. Given that these mechanisms often act on the same neurons, we ask here if there are any benefits in combining the two. We show that the interaction between the two has important computational consequences, beyond their traditional role in maintaining network homeostasis. When combined with lateral inhibition, synaptic scaling and fast feedforward inhibition allow the circuit to learn efficiently from noisy, ambiguous inputs. For inputs not normalized by feed-forward inhibition, learning is less efficient. Given that feed-forward inhibition and synaptic scaling have been reported in various systems, our results suggest that they could generally facilitate learning in neural circuits. More broadly, our work emphasizes the importance of studying the interaction between different plasticity mechanisms for understanding circuit function.

Suggested Citation

  • Christian Keck & Cristina Savin & Jörg Lücke, 2012. "Feedforward Inhibition and Synaptic Scaling – Two Sides of the Same Coin?," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(3), pages 1-15, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1002432
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002432
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002432
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002432&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002432?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gina G. Turrigiano & Kenneth R. Leslie & Niraj S. Desai & Lana C. Rutherford & Sacha B. Nelson, 1998. "Activity-dependent scaling of quantal amplitude in neocortical neurons," Nature, Nature, vol. 391(6670), pages 892-896, February.
    2. Shawn R. Olsen & Rachel I. Wilson, 2008. "Lateral presynaptic inhibition mediates gain control in an olfactory circuit," Nature, Nature, vol. 452(7190), pages 956-960, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. David Kappel & Bernhard Nessler & Wolfgang Maass, 2014. "STDP Installs in Winner-Take-All Circuits an Online Approximation to Hidden Markov Model Learning," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(3), pages 1-22, March.
    2. Bernhard Nessler & Michael Pfeiffer & Lars Buesing & Wolfgang Maass, 2013. "Bayesian Computation Emerges in Generic Cortical Microcircuits through Spike-Timing-Dependent Plasticity," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(4), pages 1-30, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Matteo Saponati & Martin Vinck, 2023. "Sequence anticipation and spike-timing-dependent plasticity emerge from a predictive learning rule," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-13, December.
    2. Niranjan Chakravarthy & Shivkumar Sabesan & Kostas Tsakalis & Leon Iasemidis, 2009. "Controlling epileptic seizures in a neural mass model," Journal of Combinatorial Optimization, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 98-116, January.
    3. Sacha Jennifer van Albada & Moritz Helias & Markus Diesmann, 2015. "Scalability of Asynchronous Networks Is Limited by One-to-One Mapping between Effective Connectivity and Correlations," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(9), pages 1-37, September.
    4. Dean J. Kareemo & Christina S. Winborn & Samantha S. Olah & Carley N. Miller & JungMin Kim & Chelsie A. Kadgien & Hannah S. Actor-Engel & Harrison J. Ramsay & Austin M. Ramsey & Jason Aoto & Matthew J, 2024. "Genetically encoded intrabody probes for labeling and manipulating AMPA-type glutamate receptors," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-18, December.
    5. Eyal Rozenfeld & Nadine Ehmann & Julia E. Manoim & Robert J. Kittel & Moshe Parnas, 2023. "Homeostatic synaptic plasticity rescues neural coding reliability," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-14, December.
    6. repec:plo:pone00:0037364 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. repec:plo:pcbi00:1004640 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. repec:plo:pcbi00:1000618 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Aseel Shomar & Lukas Geyrhofer & Noam E Ziv & Naama Brenner, 2017. "Cooperative stochastic binding and unbinding explain synaptic size dynamics and statistics," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(7), pages 1-24, July.
    10. Yilun Zhang & Tatyana O Sharpee, 2016. "A Robust Feedforward Model of the Olfactory System," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(4), pages 1-15, April.
    11. repec:plo:pone00:0063400 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Juan Prada & Manju Sasi & Corinna Martin & Sibylle Jablonka & Thomas Dandekar & Robert Blum, 2018. "An open source tool for automatic spatiotemporal assessment of calcium transients and local ‘signal-close-to-noise’ activity in calcium imaging data," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(3), pages 1-34, March.
    13. Kendra S Burbank, 2015. "Mirrored STDP Implements Autoencoder Learning in a Network of Spiking Neurons," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(12), pages 1-25, December.
    14. repec:plo:pcbi00:1004942 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Inga Petelski & Yannick Günzel & Sercan Sayin & Susanne Kraus & Einat Couzin-Fuchs, 2024. "Synergistic olfactory processing for social plasticity in desert locusts," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-15, December.
    16. repec:plo:pcbi00:1004750 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Tyler R. Sizemore & Julius Jonaitis & Andrew M. Dacks, 2023. "Heterogeneous receptor expression underlies non-uniform peptidergic modulation of olfaction in Drosophila," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-22, December.
    18. repec:plo:pcbi00:1003133 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Mami Nakamizo-Dojo & Kenichi Ishii & Jiro Yoshino & Masato Tsuji & Kazuo Emoto, 2023. "Descending GABAergic pathway links brain sugar-sensing to peripheral nociceptive gating in Drosophila," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-18, December.
    20. repec:plo:pone00:0230327 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Iris Reuveni & Sourav Ghosh & Edi Barkai, 2017. "Real Time Multiplicative Memory Amplification Mediated by Whole-Cell Scaling of Synaptic Response in Key Neurons," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(1), pages 1-31, January.
    22. Mizusaki, Beatriz E.P. & Agnes, Everton J. & Erichsen, Rubem & Brunnet, Leonardo G., 2017. "Learning and retrieval behavior in recurrent neural networks with pre-synaptic dependent homeostatic plasticity," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 479(C), pages 279-286.
    23. Giorgia Dellaferrera & Stanisław Woźniak & Giacomo Indiveri & Angeliki Pantazi & Evangelos Eleftheriou, 2022. "Introducing principles of synaptic integration in the optimization of deep neural networks," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-14, December.
    24. Eyal Rozenfeld & Merav Tauber & Yair Ben-Chaim & Moshe Parnas, 2021. "GPCR voltage dependence controls neuronal plasticity and behavior," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 12(1), pages 1-11, December.
    25. John Palmer & Adam Keane & Pulin Gong, 2017. "Learning and executing goal-directed choices by internally generated sequences in spiking neural circuits," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(7), pages 1-23, July.
    26. Angulo-Garcia, David & Torcini, Alessandro, 2014. "Stable chaos in fluctuation driven neural circuits," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 233-245.
    27. Tiziano D’Albis & Richard Kempter, 2017. "A single-cell spiking model for the origin of grid-cell patterns," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(10), pages 1-41, October.
    28. Burak Gür & Luisa Ramirez & Jacqueline Cornean & Freya Thurn & Sebastian Molina-Obando & Giordano Ramos-Traslosheros & Marion Silies, 2024. "Neural pathways and computations that achieve stable contrast processing tuned to natural scenes," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-18, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1002432. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ploscompbiol (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.