Simulation of networks of spiking neurons: A review of tools and strategies

We review different aspects of the simulation of spiking neural networks. We start by reviewing the different types of simulation strategies and algorithms that are currently implemented. We next review the precision of those simulation strategies, in particular in cases where plasticity depends on the exact timing of the spikes. We overview different simulators and simulation environments presently available (restricted to those freely available, open source and documented). For each simulation tool, its advantages and pitfalls are reviewed, with an aim to allow the reader to identify which simulator is appropriate for a given task. Finally, we provide a series of benchmark simulations of different types of networks of spiking neurons, including Hodgkin-Huxley type, integrate-and-fire models, interacting with current-based or conductance-based synapses, using clock-driven or event-driven integration strategies. The same set of models are implemented on the different simulators, and the codes are made available. The ultimate goal of this review is to provide a resource to facilitate identifying the appropriate integration strategy and simulation tool to use for a given modeling problem related to spiking neural networks.Comment: 49 pages, 24 figures, 1 table; review article, Journal of Computational Neuroscience, in press (2007

Memory and information processing in neuromorphic systems

A striking difference between brain-inspired neuromorphic processors and current von Neumann processors architectures is the way in which memory and processing is organized. As Information and Communication Technologies continue to address the need for increased computational power through the increase of cores within a digital processor, neuromorphic engineers and scientists can complement this need by building processor architectures where memory is distributed with the processing. In this paper we present a survey of brain-inspired processor architectures that support models of cortical networks and deep neural networks. These architectures range from serial clocked implementations of multi-neuron systems to massively parallel asynchronous ones and from purely digital systems to mixed analog/digital systems which implement more biological-like models of neurons and synapses together with a suite of adaptation and learning mechanisms analogous to the ones found in biological nervous systems. We describe the advantages of the different approaches being pursued and present the challenges that need to be addressed for building artificial neural processing systems that can display the richness of behaviors seen in biological systems.Comment: Submitted to Proceedings of IEEE, review of recently proposed neuromorphic computing platforms and system

Closing the loop between neural network simulators and the OpenAI Gym

Since the enormous breakthroughs in machine learning over the last decade, functional neural network models are of growing interest for many researchers in the field of computational neuroscience. One major branch of research is concerned with biologically plausible implementations of reinforcement learning, with a variety of different models developed over the recent years. However, most studies in this area are conducted with custom simulation scripts and manually implemented tasks. This makes it hard for other researchers to reproduce and build upon previous work and nearly impossible to compare the performance of different learning architectures. In this work, we present a novel approach to solve this problem, connecting benchmark tools from the field of machine learning and state-of-the-art neural network simulators from computational neuroscience. This toolchain enables researchers in both fields to make use of well-tested high-performance simulation software supporting biologically plausible neuron, synapse and network models and allows them to evaluate and compare their approach on the basis of standardized environments of varying complexity. We demonstrate the functionality of the toolchain by implementing a neuronal actor-critic architecture for reinforcement learning in the NEST simulator and successfully training it on two different environments from the OpenAI Gym

BrainFrame: A node-level heterogeneous accelerator platform for neuron simulations

Objective: The advent of High-Performance Computing (HPC) in recent years has led to its increasing use in brain study through computational models. The scale and complexity of such models are constantly increasing, leading to challenging computational requirements. Even though modern HPC platforms can often deal with such challenges, the vast diversity of the modeling field does not permit for a single acceleration (or homogeneous) platform to effectively address the complete array of modeling requirements. Approach: In this paper we propose and build BrainFrame, a heterogeneous acceleration platform, incorporating three distinct acceleration technologies, a Dataflow Engine, a Xeon Phi and a GP-GPU. The PyNN framework is also integrated into the platform. As a challenging proof of concept, we analyze the performance of BrainFrame on different instances of a state-of-the-art neuron model, modeling the Inferior- Olivary Nucleus using a biophysically-meaningful, extended Hodgkin-Huxley representation. The model instances take into account not only the neuronal- network dimensions but also different network-connectivity circumstances that can drastically change application workload characteristics. Main results: The synthetic approach of three HPC technologies demonstrated that BrainFrame is better able to cope with the modeling diversity encountered. Our performance analysis shows clearly that the model directly affect performance and all three technologies are required to cope with all the model use cases.Comment: 16 pages, 18 figures, 5 table

Neuromorphic Hardware In The Loop: Training a Deep Spiking Network on the BrainScaleS Wafer-Scale System

Emulating spiking neural networks on analog neuromorphic hardware offers several advantages over simulating them on conventional computers, particularly in terms of speed and energy consumption. However, this usually comes at the cost of reduced control over the dynamics of the emulated networks. In this paper, we demonstrate how iterative training of a hardware-emulated network can compensate for anomalies induced by the analog substrate. We first convert a deep neural network trained in software to a spiking network on the BrainScaleS wafer-scale neuromorphic system, thereby enabling an acceleration factor of 10 000 compared to the biological time domain. This mapping is followed by the in-the-loop training, where in each training step, the network activity is first recorded in hardware and then used to compute the parameter updates in software via backpropagation. An essential finding is that the parameter updates do not have to be precise, but only need to approximately follow the correct gradient, which simplifies the computation of updates. Using this approach, after only several tens of iterations, the spiking network shows an accuracy close to the ideal software-emulated prototype. The presented techniques show that deep spiking networks emulated on analog neuromorphic devices can attain good computational performance despite the inherent variations of the analog substrate.Comment: 8 pages, 10 figures, submitted to IJCNN 201

Spiking Neural Networks for Inference and Learning: A Memristor-based Design Perspective

On metrics of density and power efficiency, neuromorphic technologies have the potential to surpass mainstream computing technologies in tasks where real-time functionality, adaptability, and autonomy are essential. While algorithmic advances in neuromorphic computing are proceeding successfully, the potential of memristors to improve neuromorphic computing have not yet born fruit, primarily because they are often used as a drop-in replacement to conventional memory. However, interdisciplinary approaches anchored in machine learning theory suggest that multifactor plasticity rules matching neural and synaptic dynamics to the device capabilities can take better advantage of memristor dynamics and its stochasticity. Furthermore, such plasticity rules generally show much higher performance than that of classical Spike Time Dependent Plasticity (STDP) rules. This chapter reviews the recent development in learning with spiking neural network models and their possible implementation with memristor-based hardware

Toward Building Hybrid Biological/in silico Neural Networks for Motor Neuroprosthetic Control

WOS: 000370402900001PubMed ID: 26321943In this article, we introduce the Bioinspired Neuroprosthetic Design Environment (BNDE) as a practical platform for the development of novel brain-machine interface (BMI) controllers, which are based on spiking model neurons. We built the BNDE around a hard real-time system so that it is capable of creating simulated synapses from extra-cellularly recorded neurons to model neurons. In order to evaluate the practicality of the BNDE for neuroprosthetic control experiments, a novel, adaptive BMI controller was developed and tested using real-time closed-loop simulations. The present controller consists of two in silico medium spiny neurons, which receive simulated synaptic inputs from recorded motor cortical neurons. In the closed-loop simulations, the recordings from the cortical neurons were imitated using an external, hardware-based neural signal synthesizer. By implementing a reward-modulated spike timing-dependent plasticity rule, the controller achieved perfect target reach accuracy for a two-target reaching task in one-dimensional space. The BNDE combines the flexibility of software-based spiking neural network (SNN) simulations with powerful online data visualization tools and is a low-cost, PC-based, and all-in-one solution for developing neurally inspired BMI controllers. We believe that the BNDE is the first implementation, which is capable of creating hybrid biological/in silico neural networks for motor neuroprosthetic control and utilizes multiple CPU cores for computationally intensive real-time SNN simulations.Bogazici University BAP Grants [10XD3]; Bogazici University Life Sciences and Technologies Research Center [09K120520]This research was supported by Bogazici University BAP Grants #10XD3 and Bogazici University Life Sciences and Technologies Research Center #09K120520

Can biological quantum networks solve NP-hard problems?

There is a widespread view that the human brain is so complex that it cannot be efficiently simulated by universal Turing machines. During the last decades the question has therefore been raised whether we need to consider quantum effects to explain the imagined cognitive power of a conscious mind. This paper presents a personal view of several fields of philosophy and computational neurobiology in an attempt to suggest a realistic picture of how the brain might work as a basis for perception, consciousness and cognition. The purpose is to be able to identify and evaluate instances where quantum effects might play a significant role in cognitive processes. Not surprisingly, the conclusion is that quantum-enhanced cognition and intelligence are very unlikely to be found in biological brains. Quantum effects may certainly influence the functionality of various components and signalling pathways at the molecular level in the brain network, like ion ports, synapses, sensors, and enzymes. This might evidently influence the functionality of some nodes and perhaps even the overall intelligence of the brain network, but hardly give it any dramatically enhanced functionality. So, the conclusion is that biological quantum networks can only approximately solve small instances of NP-hard problems. On the other hand, artificial intelligence and machine learning implemented in complex dynamical systems based on genuine quantum networks can certainly be expected to show enhanced performance and quantum advantage compared with classical networks. Nevertheless, even quantum networks can only be expected to efficiently solve NP-hard problems approximately. In the end it is a question of precision - Nature is approximate.Comment: 38 page