IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pcbi00/1005390.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

On the stability and dynamics of stochastic spiking neuron models: Nonlinear Hawkes process and point process GLMs

Author

Listed:
  • Felipe Gerhard
  • Moritz Deger
  • Wilson Truccolo

Abstract

Point process generalized linear models (PP-GLMs) provide an important statistical framework for modeling spiking activity in single-neurons and neuronal networks. Stochastic stability is essential when sampling from these models, as done in computational neuroscience to analyze statistical properties of neuronal dynamics and in neuro-engineering to implement closed-loop applications. Here we show, however, that despite passing common goodness-of-fit tests, PP-GLMs estimated from data are often unstable, leading to divergent firing rates. The inclusion of absolute refractory periods is not a satisfactory solution since the activity then typically settles into unphysiological rates. To address these issues, we derive a framework for determining the existence and stability of fixed points of the expected conditional intensity function (CIF) for general PP-GLMs. Specifically, in nonlinear Hawkes PP-GLMs, the CIF is expressed as a function of the previous spike history and exogenous inputs. We use a mean-field quasi-renewal (QR) approximation that decomposes spike history effects into the contribution of the last spike and an average of the CIF over all spike histories prior to the last spike. Fixed points for stationary rates are derived as self-consistent solutions of integral equations. Bifurcation analysis and the number of fixed points predict that the original models can show stable, divergent, and metastable (fragile) dynamics. For fragile models, fluctuations of the single-neuron dynamics predict expected divergence times after which rates approach unphysiologically high values. This metric can be used to estimate the probability of rates to remain physiological for given time periods, e.g., for simulation purposes. We demonstrate the use of the stability framework using simulated single-neuron examples and neurophysiological recordings. Finally, we show how to adapt PP-GLM estimation procedures to guarantee model stability. Overall, our results provide a stability framework for data-driven PP-GLMs and shed new light on the stochastic dynamics of state-of-the-art statistical models of neuronal spiking activity.Author summary: Earthquakes, gene regulatory elements, financial transactions, and action potentials produced by nerve cells are examples of sequences of discrete events in space or time. In many cases, such events do not appear independently of each other. Instead, the occurrence of one event changes the rate of upcoming events (e.g, aftershocks following an earthquake). The nonlinear Hawkes process is a statistical model that captures these complex dependencies. Unfortunately, for a given model, it is hard to predict whether stochastic samples will produce an event pattern consistent with observations. In particular, with positive feedback loops, the process might diverge and yield unrealistically high event rates. Here, we show that an approximation to the mathematical model predicts dynamical properties, in particular, whether the model will exhibit stable and finite rates. In the context of neurophysiology, we find that models estimated from experimental data often tend to show metastability or even unstable dynamics. Our framework can be used to add constraints to data-driven estimation procedures to find the optimal model with realistic event rates and help to build more robust models of single-cell spiking dynamics. It is a first step towards studying the stability of large-scale nonlinear spiking neural network models estimated from data.

Suggested Citation

  • Felipe Gerhard & Moritz Deger & Wilson Truccolo, 2017. "On the stability and dynamics of stochastic spiking neuron models: Nonlinear Hawkes process and point process GLMs," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(2), pages 1-31, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1005390
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005390
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005390
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005390&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005390?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. Matteo Carandini, 2004. "Amplification of Trial-to-Trial Response Variability by Neurons in Visual Cortex," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 2(9), pages 1-1, August.
    2. Jonathan W. Pillow & Jonathon Shlens & Liam Paninski & Alexander Sher & Alan M. Litke & E. J. Chichilnisky & Eero P. Simoncelli, 2008. "Spatio-temporal correlations and visual signalling in a complete neuronal population," Nature, Nature, vol. 454(7207), pages 995-999, August.
    3. Kazutaka Takahashi & Sanggyun Kim & Todd P. Coleman & Kevin A. Brown & Aaron J. Suminski & Matthew D. Best & Nicholas G. Hatsopoulos, 2015. "Large-scale spatiotemporal spike patterning consistent with wave propagation in motor cortex," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 6(1), pages 1-11, November.
    4. Richard Naud & Wulfram Gerstner, 2012. "Coding and Decoding with Adapting Neurons: A Population Approach to the Peri-Stimulus Time Histogram," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(10), pages 1-14, October.
    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. Paraskevov, A.V. & Minkin, A.S., 2022. "Damped oscillations of the probability of random events followed by absolute refractory period: exact analytical results," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    2. Peter Boyd & James Molyneux, 2021. "Assessing the contagiousness of mass shootings with nonparametric Hawkes processes," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(3), pages 1-18, March.
    3. Philip A. White & Alan E. Gelfand, 2021. "Generalized Evolutionary Point Processes: Model Specifications and Model Comparison," Methodology and Computing in Applied Probability, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 1001-1021, September.
    4. Maxime Morariu-Patrichi & Mikko S. Pakkanen, 2017. "Hybrid marked point processes: characterisation, existence and uniqueness," Papers 1707.06970, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2018.
    5. Lu-ning Zhang & Jian-wei Liu & Xin Zuo, 2023. "Doubly time-dependent Hawkes process and applications in failure sequence analysis," Computational Statistics, Springer, vol. 38(2), pages 1057-1093, June.
    6. Pfaffelhuber, P. & Rotter, S. & Stiefel, J., 2022. "Mean-field limits for non-linear Hawkes processes with excitation and inhibition," Stochastic Processes and their Applications, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 57-78.

    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. Schmutz, Valentin, 2022. "Mean-field limit of age and leaky memory dependent Hawkes processes," Stochastic Processes and their Applications, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 39-59.
    2. Arne F Meyer & Jan-Philipp Diepenbrock & Max F K Happel & Frank W Ohl & Jörn Anemüller, 2014. "Discriminative Learning of Receptive Fields from Responses to Non-Gaussian Stimulus Ensembles," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(4), pages 1-15, April.
    3. Jonathan Rubin & Nachum Ulanovsky & Israel Nelken & Naftali Tishby, 2016. "The Representation of Prediction Error in Auditory Cortex," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(8), pages 1-28, August.
    4. Franklin Leong & Babak Rahmani & Demetri Psaltis & Christophe Moser & Diego Ghezzi, 2024. "An actor-model framework for visual sensory encoding," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-13, December.
    5. Lucas Rudelt & Daniel González Marx & Michael Wibral & Viola Priesemann, 2021. "Embedding optimization reveals long-lasting history dependence in neural spiking activity," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(6), pages 1-51, June.
    6. Pengcheng Zhou & Shawn D Burton & Adam C Snyder & Matthew A Smith & Nathaniel N Urban & Robert E Kass, 2015. "Establishing a Statistical Link between Network Oscillations and Neural Synchrony," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(10), pages 1-25, October.
    7. Lin, Lihui, 2021. "Does the procedure matter?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    8. Richard Naud & Wulfram Gerstner, 2012. "Coding and Decoding with Adapting Neurons: A Population Approach to the Peri-Stimulus Time Histogram," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(10), pages 1-14, October.
    9. Kenneth W. Latimer & David J. Freedman, 2023. "Low-dimensional encoding of decisions in parietal cortex reflects long-term training history," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-24, December.
    10. Braden A W Brinkman & Alison I Weber & Fred Rieke & Eric Shea-Brown, 2016. "How Do Efficient Coding Strategies Depend on Origins of Noise in Neural Circuits?," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(10), pages 1-34, October.
    11. Jason S Prentice & Olivier Marre & Mark L Ioffe & Adrianna R Loback & Gašper Tkačik & Michael J Berry II, 2016. "Error-Robust Modes of the Retinal Population Code," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(11), pages 1-32, November.
    12. Yanyun Ren & Xiaobo Bu & Ming Wang & Yue Gong & Junjie Wang & Yuyang Yang & Guijun Li & Meng Zhang & Ye Zhou & Su-Ting Han, 2022. "Synaptic plasticity in self-powered artificial striate cortex for binocular orientation selectivity," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-11, December.
    13. Jan Humplik & Gašper Tkačik, 2017. "Probabilistic models for neural populations that naturally capture global coupling and criticality," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(9), pages 1-26, September.
    14. Urs Köster & Jascha Sohl-Dickstein & Charles M Gray & Bruno A Olshausen, 2014. "Modeling Higher-Order Correlations within Cortical Microcolumns," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(7), pages 1-12, July.
    15. Philip A. White & Alan E. Gelfand, 2021. "Generalized Evolutionary Point Processes: Model Specifications and Model Comparison," Methodology and Computing in Applied Probability, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 1001-1021, September.
    16. Michael E Rule & David Schnoerr & Matthias H Hennig & Guido Sanguinetti, 2019. "Neural field models for latent state inference: Application to large-scale neuronal recordings," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(11), pages 1-23, November.
    17. Martin J M Lankheet & P Christiaan Klink & Bart G Borghuis & André J Noest, 2012. "Spike-Interval Triggered Averaging Reveals a Quasi-Periodic Spiking Alternative for Stochastic Resonance in Catfish Electroreceptors," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(3), pages 1-11, March.
    18. Medina, José M. & Díaz, José A., 2016. "Extreme reaction times determine fluctuation scaling in human color vision," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 461(C), pages 125-132.
    19. Liangyu Tao & Samuel P. Wechsler & Vikas Bhandawat, 2023. "Sensorimotor transformation underlying odor-modulated locomotion in walking Drosophila," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-22, December.
    20. Srdjan Ostojic & Nicolas Brunel, 2011. "From Spiking Neuron Models to Linear-Nonlinear Models," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(1), pages 1-16, January.

    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:pcbi00:1005390. 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.