4.7 Article

Energy-efficient neuronal computation via quantal synaptic failures

Journal

JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE
Volume 22, Issue 11, Pages 4746-4755

Publisher

SOC NEUROSCIENCE
DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.22-11-04746.2002

Keywords

computation; efficiency; energy; entropy; information theory; mutual information; optimization; quantal failures; Shannon

Categories

Funding

  1. NIMH NIH HHS [MH57358, MH48161, R01 MH048161] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Organisms evolve as compromises, and many of these compromises can be expressed in terms of energy efficiency. For example, a compromise between rate of information processing and the energy consumed might explain certain neurophysiological and neuroanatomical observations (e. g., average firing frequency and number of neurons). Using this perspective reveals that the randomness injected into neural processing by the statistical uncertainty of synaptic transmission optimizes one kind of information processing relative to energy use. A critical hypothesis and insight is that neuronal information processing is appropriately measured, first, by considering dendrosomatic summation as a Shannon-type channel (1948) and, second, by considering such uncertain synaptic transmission as part of the dendrosomatic computation rather than as part of axonal information transmission. Using such a model of neural computation and matching the information gathered by dendritic summation to the axonal information transmitted, H( p*), conditions are defined that guarantee synaptic failures can improve the energetic efficiency of neurons. Further development provides a general expression relating optimal failure rate, f, to average firing rate, p*, and is consistent with physiologically observed values. The expression providing this relationship, f approximate to 4 (-H(p*)), generalizes across activity levels and is independent of the number of inputs to a neuron.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available