Brian 2, an intuitive and efficient neural simulator

  1. Marcel Stimberg  Is a corresponding author
  2. Romain Brette
  3. Dan FM Goodman
  1. Sorbonne Université, INSERM, CNRS, France
  2. Imperial College London, United Kingdom

Abstract

Brian 2 allows scientists to simply and efficiently simulate spiking neural network models. These models can feature novel dynamical equations, their interactions with the environment, and experimental protocols. To preserve high performance when defining new models, most simulators offer two options: low-level programming or description languages. The first option requires expertise, is prone to errors, and is problematic for reproducibility. The second option cannot describe all aspects of a computational experiment, such as the potentially complex logic of a stimulation protocol. Brian addresses these issues using runtime code generation. Scientists write code with simple and concise high-level descriptions, and Brian transforms them into efficient low-level code that can run interleaved with their code. We illustrate this with several challenging examples: a plastic model of the pyloric network, a closed-loop sensorimotor model, a programmatic exploration of a neuron model, and an auditory model with real-time input.

Data availability

Source code to replicate Figures 1-7, as well as the simulations shown in Appendix 4, are provided in a github repository (https://github.com/brian-team/brian2_paper_examples). Source code to run benchmarks as presented in Figure 8 is provided as a supplementary file together with this submission (benchmark_code.zip)

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Marcel Stimberg

    Institut de la Vision, Sorbonne Université, INSERM, CNRS, Paris, France
    For correspondence
    marcel.stimberg@inserm.fr
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-2648-4790
  2. Romain Brette

    Institut de la Vision, Sorbonne Université, INSERM, CNRS, Paris, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-0110-1623
  3. Dan FM Goodman

    Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-1007-6474

Funding

Agence Nationale de la Recherche (Axode ANR-14-CE13-0003)

  • Romain Brette

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Frances K Skinner, Krembil Research Institute, University Health Network, Canada

Publication history

  1. Received: April 1, 2019
  2. Accepted: August 19, 2019
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: August 20, 2019 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: October 10, 2019 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2019, Stimberg et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 9,127
    Page views
  • 830
    Downloads
  • 119
    Citations

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Crossref, Scopus, PubMed Central.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Marcel Stimberg
  2. Romain Brette
  3. Dan FM Goodman
(2019)
Brian 2, an intuitive and efficient neural simulator
eLife 8:e47314.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.47314

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Nikoloz Sirmpilatze et al.
    Research Article

    During deep anesthesia, the electroencephalographic (EEG) signal of the brain alternates between bursts of activity and periods of relative silence (suppressions). The origin of burst-suppression and its distribution across the brain remain matters of debate. In this work, we used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to map the brain areas involved in anesthesia-induced burst-suppression across four mammalian species: humans, long-tailed macaques, common marmosets, and rats. At first, we determined the fMRI signatures of burst-suppression in human EEG-fMRI data. Applying this method to animal fMRI datasets, we found distinct burst-suppression signatures in all species. The burst-suppression maps revealed a marked inter-species difference: in rats, the entire neocortex engaged in burst-suppression, while in primates most sensory areas were excluded—predominantly the primary visual cortex. We anticipate that the identified species-specific fMRI signatures and whole-brain maps will guide future targeted studies investigating the cellular and molecular mechanisms of burst-suppression in unconscious states.

    1. Neuroscience
    Maria Ribeiro, Miguel Castelo-Branco
    Research Article

    In humans, ageing is characterized by decreased brain signal variability and increased behavioral variability. To understand how reduced brain variability segregates with increased behavioral variability, we investigated the association between reaction time variability, evoked brain responses and ongoing brain signal dynamics, in young (N=36) and older adults (N=39). We studied the electroencephalogram (EEG) and pupil size fluctuations to characterize the cortical and arousal responses elicited by a cued go/no-go task. Evoked responses were strongly modulated by slow (<2 Hz) fluctuations of the ongoing signals, which presented reduced power in the older participants. Although variability of the evoked responses was lower in the older participants, once we adjusted for the effect of the ongoing signal fluctuations, evoked responses were equally variable in both groups. Moreover, the modulation of the evoked responses caused by the ongoing signal fluctuations had no impact on reaction time, thereby explaining why although ongoing brain signal variability is decreased in older individuals, behavioral variability is not. Finally, we showed that adjusting for the effect of the ongoing signal was critical to unmask the link between neural responses and behavior as well as the link between task-related evoked EEG and pupil responses.