IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jmathe/v11y2023i3p714-d1052495.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Comparative Analysis of Numerical Methods for Solving the Leaky Integrate and Fire Neuron Model

Author

Listed:
  • Ghinwa El Masri

    (Biomedical Engineering Graduate Program, American University of Sharjah, Sharjah 26666, United Arab Emirates)

  • Asma Ali

    (Electrical Engineering Graduate Program, American University of Sharjah, Sharjah 26666, United Arab Emirates)

  • Waad H. Abuwatfa

    (Chemical and Biological Engineering Department, American University of Sharjah, Sharjah 26666, United Arab Emirates
    Materials Science and Engineering Program, College of Arts and Sciences, American University of Sharjah, Sharjah 26666, United Arab Emirates)

  • Maruf Mortula

    (Civil Engineering Department, American University of Sharjah, Sharjah 26666, United Arab Emirates)

  • Ghaleb A. Husseini

    (Chemical and Biological Engineering Department, American University of Sharjah, Sharjah 26666, United Arab Emirates
    Materials Science and Engineering Program, College of Arts and Sciences, American University of Sharjah, Sharjah 26666, United Arab Emirates)

Abstract

The human nervous system is one of the most complex systems of the human body. Understanding its behavior is crucial in drug discovery and developing medical devices. One approach to understanding such a system is to model its most basic unit, neurons. The leaky integrate and fire (LIF) method models the neurons’ response to a stimulus. Given the fact that the model’s equation is a linear ordinary differential equation, the purpose of this research is to compare which numerical analysis method gives the best results for the simplified version of this model. Adams predictor and corrector (AB4-AM4) and Heun’s methods were then used to solve the equation. In addition, this study further researches the effects of different current input models on the LIF’s voltage output. In terms of the computational time, Heun’s method was 0.01191 s on average which is much less than that of the AB-AM4 method (0.057138) for a constant DC input. As for the root mean square error, the AB-AM4 method had a much lower value (0.0061) compared to that of Heun’s method (0.3272) for the same constant input. Therefore, our results show that Heun’s method is best suited for the simplified LIF model since it had the lowest computation time of 36 ms, was stable over a larger range, and had an accuracy of 72% for the varying sinusoidal current input model.

Suggested Citation

  • Ghinwa El Masri & Asma Ali & Waad H. Abuwatfa & Maruf Mortula & Ghaleb A. Husseini, 2023. "A Comparative Analysis of Numerical Methods for Solving the Leaky Integrate and Fire Neuron Model," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-15, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:11:y:2023:i:3:p:714-:d:1052495
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/11/3/714/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/11/3/714/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Abushet Hayalu Workie & Jia-Bao Liu, 2020. "New Modification on Heun’s Method Based on Contraharmonic Mean for Solving Initial Value Problems with High Efficiency," Journal of Mathematics, Hindawi, vol. 2020, pages 1-9, December.
    2. Dipty Sharma & Paramjeet Singh & Ravi P. Agarwal & Mehmet Emir Koksal, 2019. "Numerical Approximation for Nonlinear Noisy Leaky Integrate-and-Fire Neuronal Model," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-15, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      Corrections

      All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:11:y:2023:i:3:p:714-:d:1052495. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

      If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

      If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

      For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

      Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

      IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.