Elsevier

Neurocomputing

Volumes 44–46, June 2002, Pages 1119-1126
Neurocomputing

Test of spike-sorting algorithms on the basis of simulated network data

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-2312(02)00432-0Get rights and content

Abstract

Results of spike-sorting algorithms are usually compared with recorded signals which themselves underly interpretations, distortions and errors. Our approach is to provide and compare physiological extracellular potential data by a realistic cortical network simulation. For this purpose, we utilize the neural simulator GENESIS and simulate a region of rat hippocampus containing 90 cells. We are able to “record” simulated extracellular potentials from “virtual electrodes” and produce test data closely resembling multisite neuronal recordings. Our realisitic, artificial data are complex and almost natural in appearance; however, current spike detection schemes appear unable to reliably detect all spikes produced.

Introduction

Progress in microtechnology development by the European VSAMUEL consortium [5] following the track started earlier at the University of Michigan [2], recently achieved multisite recording probes with 32 electrode sites on multiple purpose silicon probes. This opens the door to acquire neuronal signals which may contain spike trains from hundreds of cells [16]. Obviously, the amount of data acquired in a single experiment requires some type of automation to assign spikes to individual cells. This spike sorting is currently done by several more or less standard methods. However, a rigid assessment of their quality is needed.

Until now, results of spike-sorting algorithms have been compared with recorded signals which themselves underly interpretations, distortions, and errors. An alternative is, to run tests on artificial data generated by adding spike snippets to noisy signals [3]. This method has the advantage of control over data, but is paid for with unphysiological data. Our approach is to mimic physiological extracellular potential data in a biologically realistic network simulation. For this purpose, we utilize the freely available neural simulator GENESIS [1] to simulate a small network of 90 cortical cells and use their output for assessment within two automated spike detection algorithms [10], [17].

Section snippets

Methods

A region of cortex is represented by 72 CA3 pyramidal cells (PYR), randomly spaced at 35 up to 45μm in each direction, and 18 interspersed inhibitory interneurons. The interneurons are divided into nine feedforward and nine feedback interneurons. The only difference between the two inhibitory cell types is their pattern of connectivity. Neurons of one group are 75–85μm in x-direction and 155–165μm in y-direction apart from each other, thus alternating in y-direction. Additionally, there is a

Results and discussions

Whereas our small cortical model awaits its physiological validation by real brain recordings, the simulated extracellular, multiunit signals resemble closely experimental multisite recordings taken with silicon probes by [16]. Specifically, a bell-shaped distribution in potential amplitude along a linear site array (Fig. 3) can be found corresponding to real recordings as well. The middle electrode (i.e. GENESIS efield-object No. 4 of each array, see Fig. 2) is located close to simulated

Acknowledgements

This work was supported in part by the EU Grant IST-1999-10079.

References (17)

There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (16)

  • Neural networks: An overview of early research, current frameworks and new challenges

    2016, Neurocomputing
    Citation Excerpt :

    Thus, it is preferable to include the website of each simulator, where it is possible to find the specific details and always in an updated form. There are many other programs and frameworks, either of general purpose or that simulate functions or neural structures described in the literature, for instance: IQR [180], NeuroSpaces [181], NNET [182], NeuralSyns [183], NEUVISION [184], NeuroWeb [185], RSNNS [186], and See [187], or of particular models or levels as referenced in [188–192]. There is no specific simulator that is currently being used by the whole community (since some different approaches are more suitable than others, depending on the research task being addressed).

  • ViSAPy: A Python tool for biophysics-based generation of virtual spiking activity for evaluation of spike-sorting algorithms

    2015, Journal of Neuroscience Methods
    Citation Excerpt :

    Such ground-truth data sets, analogous to well-established benchmarking data sets in computer science (Hockney, 1996), can in principle be obtained experimentally by means of joint intracellular and extracellular recordings of action potentials (Henze et al., 2000; Harris et al., 2000), but such double recordings are difficult to do, and in practice limited to a modest number of neurons. A natural alternative is to use synthetic benchmark data, either constructed from experimentally measured spike waveforms (Wood et al., 2004; Thorbergsson et al., 2010), biophysical forward modeling (Menne et al., 2002; Eaton and Henriquez, 2005; Smith and Mtetwa, 2007; Franke et al., 2010; Thorbergsson et al., 2002), or a combination of both (Martinez et al., 2009; Camuñas Mesa and Quiroga, 2013). A limitation with use of experimentally recorded waveform templates is that not only the spike amplitude, but also the spike shape, depend on electrode position.

  • Towards reliable spike-train recordings from thousands of neurons with multielectrodes

    2012, Current Opinion in Neurobiology
    Citation Excerpt :

    Such dual recordings are difficult to do, however, and the yield in terms of the number of ground-truth spike trains will by nature be limited. An attractive alternative has thus been to use synthetic test data obtained from modeling [32,34–38]. In one approach synthetic data has been constructed based on extracellular spike shapes extracted from real data, superposed in a stochastic manner to incorporate a plausible underlying spike-train statistics [10,32,34,36].

View all citing articles on Scopus
View full text