↓ Skip to main content

Data Assimilation Methods for Neuronal State and Parameter Estimation

Overview of attention for article published in The Journal of Mathematical Neuroscience, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
47 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Data Assimilation Methods for Neuronal State and Parameter Estimation
Published in
The Journal of Mathematical Neuroscience, August 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13408-018-0066-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Matthew J. Moye, Casey O. Diekman

Abstract

This tutorial illustrates the use of data assimilation algorithms to estimate unobserved variables and unknown parameters of conductance-based neuronal models. Modern data assimilation (DA) techniques are widely used in climate science and weather prediction, but have only recently begun to be applied in neuroscience. The two main classes of DA techniques are sequential methods and variational methods. We provide computer code implementing basic versions of a method from each class, the Unscented Kalman Filter and 4D-Var, and demonstrate how to use these algorithms to infer several parameters of the Morris-Lecar model from a single voltage trace. Depending on parameters, the Morris-Lecar model exhibits qualitatively different types of neuronal excitability due to changes in the underlying bifurcation structure. We show that when presented with voltage traces from each of the various excitability regimes, the DA methods can identify parameter sets that produce the correct bifurcation structure even with initial parameter guesses that correspond to a different excitability regime. This demonstrates the ability of DA techniques to perform nonlinear state and parameter estimation and introduces the geometric structure of inferred models as a novel qualitative measure of estimation success. We conclude by discussing extensions of these DA algorithms that have appeared in the neuroscience literature.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 47 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 30%
Researcher 5 11%
Other 4 9%
Professor 3 6%
Student > Postgraduate 3 6%
Other 9 19%
Unknown 9 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 8 17%
Neuroscience 8 17%
Computer Science 4 9%
Mathematics 3 6%
Physics and Astronomy 3 6%
Other 7 15%
Unknown 14 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 April 2019.
All research outputs
#15,542,971
of 23,099,576 outputs
Outputs from The Journal of Mathematical Neuroscience
#36
of 80 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#210,180
of 331,391 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Journal of Mathematical Neuroscience
#1
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,099,576 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 80 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.5. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 331,391 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them