Dynamical Systems in Neuroscience:

Dynamical Systems in Neuroscience: Dynamical Systems in Neuroscience:

ib.cnea.gov.ar
from ib.cnea.gov.ar More from this publisher
12.07.2015 Views

436 Solutions to Exercises, Chap. 9Saddle-Node onInvariant CircleBifurcationSpikingSaddle-Node onInvariant CircleBifurcationRestψθFigure 10.38: Answer to Ex. 13.The system has a unique attractor — a stable equilibrium, and the solution always converges toit. The slow variable I controls the vertical position of the N-shaped nullcline. If I increases, thenullcline moves up slowly, and so does the solution because it tracks the equilibrium. However,if the rate of change of I is not small enough, the solution cannot catch up with the equilibriumand starts to oscillate with a large amplitude. Thus, the system exhibits spiking behavior eventhough it does not have a limit cycle attractor for any fixed I.12. From the first equation, we find the equivalent voltage{|z| 2 1 + u if 1 + u > 0 ,= |1 + u| + =0 if 1 + u ≤ 0 ,so that the reduced slow subsystem has the form˙u = µ[u − u 3 − w] ,ẇ = µ[|1 + u| + − 1] ,and it has essentially the same dynamics as the van der Pol oscillator.13. The fast equation˙ϑ = 1 − cos ϑ + (1 + cos ϑ)ris the Ermentrout-Kopell canonical model for Class 1 excitability, also known as the thetaneuron (Ermentrout 1996). It is quiescent when r < 0 and fires spikes when r > 0. As ψoscillates with frequency ω, the function r = r(ψ) changes sign. The fast equation undergoes asaddle-node on invariant circle bifurcation, hence the system is a “circle/circle” burster of theslow-wave type; see Fig. 10.38.14. To understand the bursting dynamics of the canonical model, we rewrite it in polar coordinatesz = re iϕ :ṙ = ur + 2r 3 − r 5 ,˙u = µ(a − r 2 ) ,˙ϕ = ω .Apparently, it is enough to consider the first two equations, which determine the oscillationprofile. Nontrivial (r ≠ 0) equilibria of this system correspond to limit cycles of the canonicalmodel, which may look like periodic (tonic) spiking with frequency ω. Limit cycles of thissystem correspond to quasi-periodic solutions of the canonical model, which look like bursting;see Fig. 9.37.The first two equation above have a unique equilibrium( ) ( √ )r a=u a 2 − 2a

Solutions to Exercises, Chap. 9 437Saddle-NodeSeparatrix LoopSaddle-Nodeon InvariantCircleSpikeInvariantFoliationFigure 10.39: A small neighborhood of the saddle-node point can be invariantly foliated by stablesubmanifolds.for all µ and a > 0, which is stable when a > 1. When a decreases and passes an µ-neighborhoodof a = 1, the equilibrium loses stability via Andronov-Hopf bifurcation. When 0 < a < 1, thesystem has a limit cycle attractor. Therefore, the canonical model exhibits bursting behavior.The smaller the value of a, the longer the interburst period. When a → 0, the interburst periodbecomes infinite.15. Take w = I − u. Then (9.7) becomes˙v = v 2 + w ,ẇ = µ(I − w) ≈ µI .16. Let us sketch the derivation. Since the fast subsystem is near saddle-node homoclinic orbitbifurcation for some u = u 0 , a small neighborhood of the saddle-node point v 0 is invariantlyfoliated by stable submanifolds, as in Fig. 10.39. Because the contraction along the stablesubmanifolds is much stronger than the dynamics along the center manifold, the fast subsystemcan be mapped into the normal form ˙v = q(u) + p(v − v 0 ) 2 by a continuos change of variables.When v escapes the small neighborhood of v 0 , the neuron is said to fire a spike, and v is resetv ← v 0 + c(u). Such a stereotypical spike also resets u by a constant d. If g(v 0 , u 0 ) ≈ 0, thenall functions are small, and linearization and appropriate re-scaling yields the canonical model.If g(v 0 , u 0 ) ≠ 0, then the canonical model has the same form as in the previous exercise.17. The derivation proceeds as in the previous exercise, yielding˙v = I + v 2 + (a, u) ,˙u = µAu .where (a, u) is the scalar (dot) product of vectors a, u ∈ R 2 , and A is the Jacobian matrixat the equilibrium of the slow subsystem. If the equilibrium is a node, it has generically twodistinct eigenvalues, and two real eigenvectors. In this case, the slow subsystem uncouples intotwo equations, each along the corresponding eigenvector. Appropriate re-scaling gives the firstcanonical model. If the equilibrium is a focus, the linear part can be made triangular to getthe second canonical model.18. The solution of the fast subsystem˙v = u + v 2 , v(0) = −1 ,with fixed u > 0 isv(t) = √ ( )√ut 1u tan − atan √u

436 Solutions to Exercises, Chap. 9Saddle-Node onInvariant CircleBifurcationSpik<strong>in</strong>gSaddle-Node onInvariant CircleBifurcationRestψθFigure 10.38: Answer to Ex. 13.The system has a unique attractor — a stable equilibrium, and the solution always converges toit. The slow variable I controls the vertical position of the N-shaped nullcl<strong>in</strong>e. If I <strong>in</strong>creases, thenullcl<strong>in</strong>e moves up slowly, and so does the solution because it tracks the equilibrium. However,if the rate of change of I is not small enough, the solution cannot catch up with the equilibriumand starts to oscillate with a large amplitude. Thus, the system exhibits spik<strong>in</strong>g behavior eventhough it does not have a limit cycle attractor for any fixed I.12. From the first equation, we f<strong>in</strong>d the equivalent voltage{|z| 2 1 + u if 1 + u > 0 ,= |1 + u| + =0 if 1 + u ≤ 0 ,so that the reduced slow subsystem has the form˙u = µ[u − u 3 − w] ,ẇ = µ[|1 + u| + − 1] ,and it has essentially the same dynamics as the van der Pol oscillator.13. The fast equation˙ϑ = 1 − cos ϑ + (1 + cos ϑ)ris the Ermentrout-Kopell canonical model for Class 1 excitability, also known as the thetaneuron (Ermentrout 1996). It is quiescent when r < 0 and fires spikes when r > 0. As ψoscillates with frequency ω, the function r = r(ψ) changes sign. The fast equation undergoes asaddle-node on <strong>in</strong>variant circle bifurcation, hence the system is a “circle/circle” burster of theslow-wave type; see Fig. 10.38.14. To understand the burst<strong>in</strong>g dynamics of the canonical model, we rewrite it <strong>in</strong> polar coord<strong>in</strong>atesz = re iϕ :ṙ = ur + 2r 3 − r 5 ,˙u = µ(a − r 2 ) ,˙ϕ = ω .Apparently, it is enough to consider the first two equations, which determ<strong>in</strong>e the oscillationprofile. Nontrivial (r ≠ 0) equilibria of this system correspond to limit cycles of the canonicalmodel, which may look like periodic (tonic) spik<strong>in</strong>g with frequency ω. Limit cycles of thissystem correspond to quasi-periodic solutions of the canonical model, which look like burst<strong>in</strong>g;see Fig. 9.37.The first two equation above have a unique equilibrium( ) ( √ )r a=u a 2 − 2a

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!