Cited by 230Neural dynamics and brain functionNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchAdvanced Memory and Neural Computing

Learning by the Dendritic Prediction of Somatic Spiking

Open access
Urbanczik, Robert, Senn, Walter·2014·Neuron

Abstract

Recent modeling of spike-timing-dependent plasticity indicates that plasticity involves as a third factor a local dendritic potential, besides pre- and postsynaptic firing times. We present a simple compartmental neuron model together with a non-Hebbian, biologically plausible learning rule for dendritic synapses where plasticity is modulated by these three factors. In functional terms, the rule seeks to minimize discrepancies between somatic firings and a local dendritic potential. Such prediction errors can arise in our model from stochastic fluctuations as well as from synaptic input, which directly targets the soma. Depending on the nature of this direct input, our plasticity rule subserves supervised or unsupervised learning. When a reward signal modulates the learning rate, reinforcement learning results. Hence a single plasticity rule supports diverse learning paradigms.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neuron.2013.11.030

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • One way to biologically implement the hippocampal replay as a target or 'teaching signal' for the FF neurons is to 'nudge' these neurons in the soma, while the synapses projecting from the FF pathway to their dendrites learn to reproduce the somatic nudging.

    “One way to biologically implement the hippocampal replay as a target or 'teaching signal' for the FF neurons is to 'nudge' these neurons in the soma, while the synapses projecting from the FF pathway to their dendrites learn to reproduce the somatic nudging [59].”
  • Such sub-networks might even be part of the same neuron and map onto apical vs. basal parts of the dendritic tree.

    “Interestingly, such sub-networks might even be part of the same neuron and map onto “apical” vs. “basal” parts of the dendritic tree (Körding and König, 2001; Urbanczik and Senn, 2014).”

    From Toward an integration of deep learning and neuroscience (2016) · cites this paper as Urbanczik and Senn, 2014

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 31 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Urbanczik, R., & Senn, W.
Affiliations
University of Bern (CH)
Corresponding author
Senn, Walter
Venue
Neuron
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-02
Volume
81
Issue
3
Pages
521-528
ISSN
0896-6273 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2006814548
Cited by
230
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 44 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 30 · 2020: 29 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 2
FWCI
5.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Neuron (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Bern Open Repository and Information System (University of Bern) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Advanced Memory and Neural Computing
Keywords
spike-timing-dependent plasticity, dendritic potentials, compartmental neuron model, dendritic synapses, prediction error, stochastic fluctuations, supervised learning, unsupervised learning, reinforcement learning
MeSH terms
Action Potentials, Animals, Computer Simulation, Dendrites, Learning, Models, Neurological, Neuronal Plasticity, Neurons, Synapses, Time Factors

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review