« Back to the index

Conventions for neuron model names

For model names we want to use the formula:

dynamics + [element type] + [psc | cond] + synaptic dynamics + [numerics]

And therefore we get:

iaf_psc_delta        IaF neuron with delta-current input pulses
iaf_psc_exp          IaF with exponentially decaying input current
iaf_psc_alpha        IaF with alpha-shaped input current
iaf_psc_alpha_presc  same, with prescient numerics
iaf_psc_alpha_canon  same, with canonical numerics
iaf_cond_alpha       IaF with conductance-based alpha input

A further label could specify the number and interpretation of the rports, for example iaf_psc_alpha_multisynapse.

For models based on specific publications the general naming rule is

<model category>_<initials>_year

Examples are - iaf_chs_2007 (Carandini M, Horton JC, Sincich LC (2007) Thalamic filtering of retinal spike trains by postsynaptic summation. J Vis 7(14):20,1-11) - iaf_chxk_2008 (Casti A, Hayot F, Xiao Y, and Kaplan E (2008) A simple model of retina-LGN transmission. J Comput Neurosci 24:235-252) - iaf_tum_2000 (Tsodyks M, Uziel A, Markram H (2000) Synchrony Generation in Recurrent Networks with Frequency-Dependent Synapses. J Neurosci 20:RC50, 1-5)

We haven’t applied these rules completely consistently, but for neuron models that are mainly known from a single paper and that have not been given a more general name in the publications that introduced them (e.g. aeif and amat models), one should stick to this rule.