We propose a statistical method for modeling the non-Poisson variability of spike trains observed in a wide range of brain regions. Central to our approach is the assumption that the variance and the mean of interspike intervals are related by a power function characterized by two parameters: the scale factor and exponent. It is shown that this single assumption allows the variability of spike trains to have an arbitrary scale and various dependencies on the firing rate in the spike count statistics, as well as in the interval statistics, depending on the two parameters of the power function. We also propose a statistical model for spike trains that exhibits the variance-to-mean power relationship. Based on this, a maximum likelihood method is developed for inferring the parameters from rate-modulated spike trains. The proposed method is illustrated on simulated and experimental spike trains.

In many cortical areas, neural spike trains do not follow a Poisson process. In this study, we investigate a possible benefit of non-Poisson spiking for information transmission by studying the minimal rate fluctuation that can be detected by a Bayesian estimator. The idea is that an inhomogeneous Poisson process may make it difficult for downstream decoders to resolve subtle changes in rate fluctuation, but by using a more regular non-Poisson process, the nervous system can make rate fluctuations easier to detect. We evaluate the degree to which regular firing reduces the rate fluctuation detection threshold. We find that the threshold for detection is reduced in proportion to the coefficient of variation of interspike intervals.

Neural coding is a field of study that concerns how sensory information is represented in the brain by networks of neurons. The link between external stimulus and neural response can be studied from two parallel points of view. The first, neural encoding, refers to the mapping from stimulus to response. It focuses primarily on understanding how neurons respond to a wide variety of stimuli and constructing models that accurately describe the stimulus-response relationship. Neural decoding refers to the reverse mapping, from response to stimulus, where the challenge is to reconstruct a stimulus from the spikes it evokes. Since neuronal response is stochastic, a one-to-one mapping of stimuli into neural responses does not exist, causing a mismatch between the two viewpoints of neural coding. Here we use these two perspectives to investigate the question of what rate coding is, in the simple setting of a single stationary stimulus parameter and a single stationary spike train represented by a renewal process. We show that when rate codes are defined in terms of encoding, that is, the stimulus parameter is mapped onto the mean firing rate, the rate decoder given by spike counts or the sample mean does not always efficiently decode the rate codes, but it can improve efficiency in reading certain rate codes when correlations within a spike train are taken into account.

Mathematical models of neurons are widely used to improve understanding of neuronal spiking behavior. These models can produce artificial spike trains that resemble actual spike train data in important ways, but they are not very easy to apply to the analysis of spike train data. Instead, statistical methods based on point process models of spike trains provide a wide range of data-analytical techniques. Two simplified point process models have been introduced in the literature: the time-rescaled renewal process (TRRP) and the multiplicative inhomogeneous Markov interval (m-IMI) model. In this letter we investigate the extent to which the TRRP and m-IMI models are able to fit spike trains produced by stimulus-driven leaky integrate-and-fire (LIF) neurons. With a constant stimulus, the LIF spike train is a renewal process, and the m-IMI and TRRP models will describe accurately the LIF spike train variability. With a time-varying stimulus, the probability of spiking under all three of these models depends on both the experimental clock time relative to the stimulus and the time since the previous spike, but it does so differently for the LIF, m-IMI, and TRRP models. We assessed the distance between the LIF model and each of the two empirical models in the presence of a time-varying stimulus. We found that while lack of fit of a Poisson model to LIF spike train data can be evident even in small samples, the m-IMI and TRRP models tend to fit well, and much larger samples are required before there is statistical evidence of lack of fit of the m-IMI or TRRP models. We also found that when the mean of the stimulus varies across time, the m-IMI model provides a better fit to the LIF data than the TRRP, and when the variance of the stimulus varies across time, the TRRP provides the better fit.