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

Rename to tau_vacant to decay_vacant #3061

Closed
wants to merge 4 commits into from

Conversation

ackurth
Copy link
Contributor

@ackurth ackurth commented Jan 2, 2024

In the structural plasticity routine vacant (i.e. at a given time unused) synaptic elements decay with a "rate" (word used in the source code) tau_vacant, also referred to as a "time constant" in one case.
I would argue the decay constant is neither a rate (units 1 / time unit) nor a time constant (units of time unit) , but a quantity without any unit.
Since tau_vacant insinuates a time constant I suggest renaming the decay constant in just decay_vacant (in line with the naming for this in this paper referring to it as a decay constant).
Also, in one case it is required that the decay constant is greater than 0.
I find this impractical and unnecessary and thus suggest to alter this to greater or equal than 0.

@terhorstd terhorstd added T: Enhancement New functionality, model or documentation S: Normal Handle this with default priority I: No breaking change Previously written code will work as before, no one should note anything changing (aside the fix) labels Jan 19, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

@heplesser heplesser left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The documentation of tau_vacant states

 *  tau_vacant       double  - Rate at which vacant synaptic elements will decay.
 *                             Typical is 0.1 which represents a loss of 10% of the vacant synaptic
 *                              elements each time  the structural_plasticity_update_interval is
 *                             reached by the simulation time.

It think it definitely a rate, if in the time unit of structural_plasticity_update_interval. I think we should discuss more thoroughly how to define this quantity properly.

Copy link
Contributor

@clinssen clinssen left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I would suggest to keep it as a "fraction" or "proportion" and document that the multiplication is done every structural_plasticity_update_interval. Perhaps "reached by the simulation time" can be rephrased.

Copy link

Pull request automatically marked stale!

@github-actions github-actions bot added the stale Automatic marker for inactivity, please have another look here label Apr 22, 2024
@heplesser
Copy link
Contributor

@ackurth Could you follow up the comments and merge master?

@ackurth
Copy link
Contributor Author

ackurth commented Sep 9, 2024

I close the PR, issue can be addressed when improving on structural plasticity in general.

@ackurth ackurth closed this Sep 9, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
I: No breaking change Previously written code will work as before, no one should note anything changing (aside the fix) S: Normal Handle this with default priority stale Automatic marker for inactivity, please have another look here T: Enhancement New functionality, model or documentation
Projects
Status: Done
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants