Neural Comp. Sign up for ETOCS
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Masuda, N.
Right arrow Articles by Aihara, K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Masuda, N.
Right arrow Articles by Aihara, K.
(Neural Computation. 2003;15:1341-1372.)
© 2003 The MIT Press


Letter

Ergodicity of Spike Trains: When Does Trial Averaging Make Sense?

Naoki Masuda

masuda{at}sat.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp, Department of Complexity Science and Engineering, Graduate School of Frontier Sciences, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan

Kazuyuki Aihara

aihara{at}sat.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp, Department of Complexity Science and Engineering, Graduate School of Frontier Sciences, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan, and CREST, Japan Science and Technology Corporation, Saitama, Japan

Neuronal information processing is often studied on the basis of spiking patterns. The relevant statistics such as firing rates calculated with the peri-stimulus time histogram are obtained by averaging spiking patterns over many experimental runs. However, animals should respond to one experimental stimulation in real situations, and what is available to the brain is not the trial statistics but the population statistics. Consequently, physiological ergodicity, namely, the consistency between trial averaging and population averaging, is implicitly assumed in the data analyses, although it does not trivially hold true. In this letter, we investigate how characteristics of noisy neural network models, such as single neuron properties, external stimuli, and synaptic inputs, affect the statistics of firing patterns. In particular, we show that how high membrane potential sensitivity to input fluctuations, inability of neurons to remember past inputs, external stimuli with large variability and temporally separated peaks, and relatively few contributions of synaptic inputs result in spike trains that are reproducible over many trials. The reproducibility of spike trains and synchronous firing are contrasted and related to the ergodicity issue. Several numerical calculations with neural network examples are carried out to support the theoretical results.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J. Neurosci.Home page
G. B. Christianson and J. L. Pena
Noise reduction of coincidence detector output by the inferior colliculus of the barn owl.
J. Neurosci., May 31, 2006; 26(22): 5948 - 5954.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Biophys. JHome page
K. Morita, K. Tsumoto, and K. Aihara
Bidirectional Modulation of Neuronal Responses by Depolarizing GABAergic Inputs
Biophys. J., March 15, 2006; 90(6): 1925 - 1938.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Neural Comput.Home page
N. Masuda, B. Doiron, A. Longtin, and K. Aihara
Coding of Temporally Varying Signals in Networks of Spiking Neurons with Global Delayed Feedback
Neural Comput., October 1, 2005; 17(10): 2139 - 2175.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
J COGNITIVE NEUROSCIENCE NEURAL COMPUTATION MIT PRESS JOURNALS
Copyright © 2003 by The MIT Press.