| Literature DB >> 34068538 |
Szymon Szczęsny1, Damian Huderek1, Łukasz Przyborowski1.
Abstract
The paper describes the architecture of a Spiking Neural Network (SNN) for time waveform analyses using edge computing. The network model was based on the principles of preprocessing signals in the diencephalon and using tonic spiking and inhibition-induced spiking models typical for the thalamus area. The research focused on a significant reduction of the complexity of the SNN algorithm by eliminating most synaptic connections and ensuring zero dispersion of weight values concerning connections between neuron layers. The paper describes a network mapping and learning algorithm, in which the number of variables in the learning process is linearly dependent on the size of the patterns. The works included testing the stability of the accuracy parameter for various network sizes. The described approach used the ability of spiking neurons to process currents of less than 100 pA, typical of amperometric techniques. An example of a practical application is an analysis of vesicle fusion signals using an amperometric system based on Carbon NanoTube (CNT) sensors. The paper concludes with a discussion of the costs of implementing the network as a semiconductor structure.Entities:
Keywords: amperometry; edge computing; exocytosis; spiking neural network; vesicle fusion
Year: 2021 PMID: 34068538 PMCID: PMC8125990 DOI: 10.3390/s21093276
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1Tonic spiking neuron response for the input current in the range of 0 ÷ 50 pA.
Figure 2Inhibition-induced spiking neuron response for an input current of −30 ÷ 70 pA.
Figure 3SNN architecture with linear computational complexity.
Figure 4The applied SNN response coding.
Figure 5Application of the described SNN in the task of analyzing data from CNT sensors.
Figure 6Amperometric waveform showing full vesicle fusion.
Figure 7Positive — and negative — patterns used in SNN training with the sampling parameter .
Network answer.
| Patterns | SE | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| positive * | 1 | 3.0 | 3.0 | 0 |
| 2 | 3.0 | 3.0 | 0 | |
| 3 | 3.0 | 3.0 | 0 | |
| … | … | … | … | |
| 21 | 3.0 | 3.0 | 0 | |
| 22 | 4.0 | 5.0 | 5 | |
| 23 | 4.0 | 5.0 | 5 | |
| … | … | … | … | |
| 38 | 4.0 | 6.0 | 10 | |
| 39 | 4.0 | 6.0 | 10 | |
| 40 | 4.0 | 6.0 | 10 | |
| negative | 1 | 5.0 | 7.0 | 20.0 |
| 2 | 8.0 | 4.0 | 26.0 | |
| 3 | 8.0 | 5.0 | 29.0 | |
| 4 | 8.0 | 5.0 | 29.0 | |
| 5 | 8.0 | 5.0 | 29.0 | |
| 6 | 9.0 | 4.0 | 37.0 | |
| … | … | … | … | |
| 36 | 18.0 | 15.0 | 369.0 | |
| 37 | 18.0 | 15.0 | 369.0 | |
| 38 | 19.0 | 15.0 | 400.0 | |
| 39 | 25.0 | 13.0 | 584.0 | |
| 40 | 27.0 | 8.0 | 601.0 | |
| * mode = [3.0, 3.0]. |
Comparison of network parameters of different sizes.
| SNN | TS | IIS | TP | TN | FP | FN | ACC | COMPLEX |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 40-1 | 35 | 5 | 40 | 40 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 40v + 166c |
| 35-1 | 31 | 4 | 40 | 40 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 35v + 146c |
| 30-1 | 26 | 4 | 40 | 40 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 30v + 126c |
| 25-1 | 22 | 3 | 40 | 40 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 25v + 106c |
| 20-1 | 17 | 3 | 40 | 40 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 20v + 86c |
| 15-1 | 13 | 2 | 40 | 38 | 2 | 0 | 0.975 | 15v + 66c |
| 10-1 | 9 | 1 | 40 | 37 | 3 | 0 | 0.9625 | 10v + 46c |
Comparison of the 20-1 network parameters vs. coding methods.
| Period (ms) | ACC | |
|---|---|---|
| resonant burst coding | 10 | 0.783 |
| coding by synchrony | 5 | 0.798 |
| phase coding | 12 | 0.941 |
| time to first spike | 4 | 0.946 |
| two latencies | 10 | 1 |
Figure 8Accuracy vs. weight mismatch.