Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Small error in the Maass_Natschlaeger_Markram_2002 example #1539

Closed
bjourne opened this issue Jun 13, 2024 · 1 comment · Fixed by #1560
Closed

Small error in the Maass_Natschlaeger_Markram_2002 example #1539

bjourne opened this issue Jun 13, 2024 · 1 comment · Fixed by #1560

Comments

@bjourne
Copy link
Contributor

bjourne commented Jun 13, 2024

Maass 2002 says:

In the case of a synaptic connection from a to b, we modeled the synaptic dynamics according to the model proposed in Markram, Wang, and Tsodyks (1998), with the synaptic parameters U (use), D (time constant for depression), and F (time constant for facilitation) randomly chosen from gaussian distributions that were based on empirically found data for such connections. Depending on whether a, b were excitatory (E) or inhibitory (I), the mean values of these three parameters (with D, F expressed in second, s) were chosen to be .5, 1.1, .05 (EE), .05, .125, 1.2 (EI), .25, .7, .02 (IE), .32, .144, and .06 (II). The SD of each parameter was chosen to be 50% of its mean (with negative values replaced by values chosen from an appropriate uniform distribution).

So the line

synapses.U[:] = np.random.normal(U, 0.5, size=N_syn)

should be

synapses.U[:] = np.random.normal(U, 0.5 * U, size=N_syn)

The change doesn't affect the result afaict.

@mstimberg
Copy link
Member

Many thanks (apologies for the late reply…), that sounds right – for D and F, this seemed to have been applied correctly.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants