arxiv: 2605.01291 · v2 · submitted 2026-05-02 · 💻 cs.LG

Recognition: unknown

Congestion-Aware Dynamic Axonal Delay for Spiking Neural Networks

Dewei Bai, Hong Qu, Hongxiang Peng, Yunyun Zeng, Ziyu Zhang

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-09 14:46 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.LG

keywords spiking neural networksaxonal delaydynamic delaycongestion awaretemporal tasksspeech recognitionparameter reductionSNN delay learning

0 comments

The pith

Spiking neural networks improve accuracy on temporal tasks by splitting axonal delays into a static base and an activity-conditioned global shift that adapts to spike congestion.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper introduces a congestion-aware dynamic axonal delay that breaks total delay into a channel-wise static base delay for basic timing structure and a single global shift that moves based on current spike intensity to adjust how fast the network updates. This split lets the model respond to varying activity levels without assigning a unique delay value to every synapse. The shifts are trained using smooth linear interpolation so gradients flow during learning, then switched to discrete values when the network runs. On speech benchmarks the approach reaches 93.75 percent accuracy on the Spiking Heidelberg Dataset, 80.69 percent on Spiking Speech Commands, and 95.58 percent on Google Speech Commands while cutting the total number of parameters by roughly half compared with earlier delay-learning methods. The claim matters because it shows a lightweight way to add adaptive timing to spiking models without the usual parameter explosion.

Core claim

The central claim is that decomposing axonal delay into a channel-wise static base delay plus a global activity-conditioned shift, learned through differentiable linear interpolation and discretized at inference, lets spiking neural networks align spikes more effectively under changing activity levels, producing higher accuracy on temporal speech tasks while using approximately 50 percent fewer parameters than prior per-synapse delay methods.

What carries the argument

The Congestion-Aware Dynamic Axonal Delay (CADAD) mechanism, which decomposes delay into a static per-channel base for temporal structure and a global shift conditioned on spike intensity to regulate state-update rate.

If this is right

Accuracy rises on temporal speech tasks when delays adjust to overall network activity rather than staying fixed per synapse.
Parameter count falls by about half relative to previous delay-learning methods that use the same network architecture.
Spike alignment improves because the global shift speeds or slows updates according to how many spikes arrive at once.
Training remains stable because differentiable interpolation lets gradients pass through the delay values.
Inference cost stays low because the learned shifts are discretized before deployment.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

The same split-delay idea could be tested on other event-driven inputs such as spiking vision or audio streams where activity density changes rapidly.
Hardware accelerators for SNNs might see memory savings from the reduced parameter count if the global shift can be broadcast efficiently.
A follow-up experiment could isolate whether the dynamic global component or the static base contributes more to the observed gains.
Combining CADAD with existing SNN pruning or quantization techniques might further improve energy use on edge devices.

Load-bearing premise

That the activity-conditioned global shift can be learned via differentiable interpolation and then discretized at inference without losing the performance gains, and that the accuracy improvements generalize beyond the three speech datasets tested.

What would settle it

Evaluating the same CADAD architecture on a non-speech temporal spiking dataset, such as a spiking version of a video or sensor classification task, and checking whether accuracy still rises over static-delay baselines by a comparable margin.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.01291 by Dewei Bai, Hong Qu, Hongxiang Peng, Yunyun Zeng, Ziyu Zhang.

**Figure 1.** Figure 1: Conceptual comparison of delay mechanisms. (a) Without delays, spikes arrive at view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: Overview of the congestion-aware dynamic axonal delay mechanism. (a) Traditional view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: Illustration of differentiable delay approximation via linear interpolation. view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: Visualization of membrane potential traces from the top-3 most active neurons in Layer 0 view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Visualization of membrane potential traces from the top-5 most active neurons in Layer 0 view at source ↗

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: Visualization of membrane potential traces from the top-5 most active neurons in Layer 1 view at source ↗

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: Visualization of membrane potential traces from the top-5 most active neurons in Layer 2 view at source ↗

read the original abstract

Spiking Neural Networks (SNNs) are widely regarded as an energy-efficient paradigm for modeling and processing temporal and event-driven information. Incorporating delays in SNNs has been proven to be an effective mechanism for improving spike alignment in event-driven tasks. However, existing delay learning approaches predominantly assign static delays to individual synapses, resulting in a large number of delay parameters and limited adaptability to input-dependent activity dynamics. To this end, we propose a Congestion-Aware Dynamic Axonal Delay (CADAD) mechanism, which decomposes the delay into a channel-wise static base delay for temporal structuring and a global, activity-conditioned shift that dynamically regulates the state update rate under varying spike intensities. The delay parameters are learned using differentiable linear interpolation and discretized at inference time, preserving the benefits of dynamic delay modulation while incurring only minimal additional cost. Experiments on speech benchmarks, including the Spiking Heidelberg Dataset, Spiking Speech Commands, and Google Speech Commands, demonstrate that introducing congestion-aware delays into synaptic signal transmission effectively improves accuracy on temporal tasks, notably achieving 93.75% accuracy on SHD, 80.69% accuracy on SSC, and 95.58% on GSC-35, while reducing the parameter count by approximately 50% compared to state-of-the-art delay-based methods with the same architecture.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

The paper splits axonal delays into channel-wise static bases plus a global activity shift, trained via interpolation then discretized, to cut parameters while lifting accuracy on speech SNN tasks.

read the letter

The main takeaway is that this work gives spiking networks a lighter way to handle timing by decomposing delay into a fixed per-channel part and a single global shift that reacts to spike congestion. They learn the shift continuously with linear interpolation and snap it to discrete steps at inference, which they say keeps the dynamic benefit without much added cost. On the three speech benchmarks the numbers are 93.75% on SHD, 80.69% on SSC, and 95.58% on GSC-35, with roughly half the delay parameters of prior static-per-synapse methods using the same base architecture. That parameter saving is the clearest practical point. The decomposition itself is a reasonable response to the scaling problem in existing delay learning; a global activity term can in principle adapt to different input rates without assigning a separate value to every synapse. The speech results line up with the claim that better temporal alignment helps on these tasks. The soft spots sit in the experimental detail and the discretization step. The abstract gives accuracy figures but does not name the precise baselines, confirm identical architectures, or report variance or significance tests, so the size of the real gain is still unclear. The stress-test concern about train-test mismatch is on target: because the shift is input-dependent and affects state timing, any gap between the continuous interpolation used in training and the final discrete values could erase the congestion awareness and leave the model closer to a static delay scheme. No ablation isolating that step appears in the summary. This is for people already working on neuromorphic or event-driven models who need cheaper ways to manage delays on temporal data. A reader focused on SNN efficiency would pick up the parameter-reduction angle and the concrete benchmark numbers. I would send it to peer review because the core mechanism is simple, the claimed efficiency gain is measurable, and the experiments can be checked and strengthened without starting from scratch.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper proposes Congestion-Aware Dynamic Axonal Delay (CADAD) for Spiking Neural Networks, decomposing axonal delays into channel-wise static base delays for temporal structuring and a global activity-conditioned shift that dynamically adjusts state-update timing based on spike congestion. The shift parameters are learned via differentiable linear interpolation during training and discretized at inference time. On the Spiking Heidelberg Dataset (SHD), Spiking Speech Commands (SSC), and Google Speech Commands (GSC-35), the method reports accuracies of 93.75%, 80.69%, and 95.58% respectively, while claiming an approximately 50% reduction in parameter count relative to state-of-the-art delay-based SNN methods using the same architecture.

Significance. If the empirical claims hold after proper controls, this would represent a meaningful advance in efficient temporal modeling for SNNs. The decomposition into static per-channel structure plus a low-cost global dynamic component offers a practical route to input-dependent delay adaptation without the parameter explosion of per-synapse delay learning, potentially benefiting neuromorphic hardware deployments on event-driven tasks.

major comments (2)

[Section 3] Section 3 (Method): The central claim that discretization of the activity-conditioned global shift at inference preserves the congestion-awareness and accuracy gains is load-bearing, yet the manuscript provides no ablation isolating the discretization step, no analysis of quantization error, and no bounds on shift magnitude. Because the shift is input-dependent and modulates timing under varying spike rates, any train-test mismatch could eliminate the distinguishing dynamic benefit over static delays.
[Section 4] Section 4 (Experiments): The reported accuracy figures and 50% parameter reduction are presented without explicit baseline architectures, statistical significance tests across multiple runs, or component ablations (e.g., static base delay alone vs. full CADAD). This leaves the contribution of the congestion-aware mechanism only partially supported.

minor comments (1)

[Abstract] Abstract: The phrase 'state-of-the-art delay-based methods with the same architecture' is used for the parameter-reduction claim but does not name the specific prior works or architectures, reducing clarity for readers.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive feedback and the recommendation for major revision. We address each major comment below with clarifications and commitments to strengthen the manuscript through targeted revisions and additional analyses.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Section 3] Section 3 (Method): The central claim that discretization of the activity-conditioned global shift at inference preserves the congestion-awareness and accuracy gains is load-bearing, yet the manuscript provides no ablation isolating the discretization step, no analysis of quantization error, and no bounds on shift magnitude. Because the shift is input-dependent and modulates timing under varying spike rates, any train-test mismatch could eliminate the distinguishing dynamic benefit over static delays.

Authors: We agree that empirical validation of the discretization step is essential to substantiate the claim that dynamic benefits are preserved at inference. In the revised manuscript, we will add an ablation comparing performance using continuous shifts versus the discretized shifts at inference time. We will also include an analysis of quantization error by quantifying the shift value differences pre- and post-discretization on the test sets, along with bounds on shift magnitude derived from the learned parameter ranges and empirical spike rate statistics across the datasets. These additions will demonstrate that train-test mismatch remains minimal and does not undermine the congestion-aware advantages. revision: yes
Referee: [Section 4] Section 4 (Experiments): The reported accuracy figures and 50% parameter reduction are presented without explicit baseline architectures, statistical significance tests across multiple runs, or component ablations (e.g., static base delay alone vs. full CADAD). This leaves the contribution of the congestion-aware mechanism only partially supported.

Authors: We thank the referee for highlighting the need for clearer experimental controls. The baselines referenced are the state-of-the-art delay-based SNN methods using identical architectures for direct parameter count comparison. In the revision, we will explicitly detail these baseline configurations and architectures. We will also report mean accuracies with standard deviations over multiple independent runs (minimum of five seeds) to establish statistical significance. Furthermore, we will add component ablations, including a static-base-delay-only variant versus the full CADAD model, to isolate the contribution of the activity-conditioned dynamic shift. These updates will provide more robust support for both accuracy gains and parameter efficiency. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: empirical architectural proposal validated on benchmarks

full rationale

The paper introduces CADAD as a decomposition of axonal delays into a channel-wise static base and an activity-conditioned global shift, with parameters learned via differentiable linear interpolation and discretized at inference. All central claims consist of empirical accuracy improvements (93.75% on SHD, etc.) and parameter reduction (~50%) on public speech datasets, without any derivation, equation, or first-principles result that reduces the reported gains to a quantity defined by the fitted parameters themselves. No self-definitional steps, fitted-input predictions, or load-bearing self-citations appear in the provided text. The work is self-contained against external benchmarks and does not invoke uniqueness theorems or ansatzes from prior author work.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 2 axioms · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard assumptions about SNNs benefiting from axonal delays for temporal alignment and on the empirical effectiveness of the new decomposition; no new physical entities are postulated.

free parameters (2)

channel-wise static base delay values
Learned per-channel parameters that structure temporal information
parameters of the global activity-conditioned shift
Learned values that modulate update rate according to spike intensity

axioms (2)

domain assumption Incorporating delays improves spike alignment in event-driven SNN tasks
Background premise stated in the opening of the abstract
standard math Differentiable linear interpolation allows end-to-end learning of delay parameters
Training technique invoked to make the dynamic component differentiable

invented entities (1)

Congestion-Aware Dynamic Axonal Delay (CADAD) no independent evidence
purpose: Decompose delay into static base and activity-dependent global shift for better adaptability
Newly introduced mechanism whose benefits are demonstrated empirically

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5541 in / 1527 out tokens · 50046 ms · 2026-05-09T14:46:56.147670+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

17 extracted references · 15 canonical work pages

[1]

Alexandre Bittar and Philip N

URL https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper_files/paper/2018/file/ c203d8a151612acf12457e4d67635a95-Paper.pdf. Alexandre Bittar and Philip N. Garner. A surrogate gradient spiking baseline for speech command recognition.Frontiers in Neuroscience, 16,

2018
[2]

doi: 10.3389/fnins.2022

ISSN 1662-453X. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2022. 865897. URLhttps://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnins.2022.865897. Jeffrey S. Bowers. Parallel Distributed Processing Theory in the Age of Deep Networks.Trends in Cognitive Sciences, pages 1–12,

work page doi:10.3389/fnins.2022 2022
[3]

doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2017.09.013

ISSN 13646613. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2017.09.013. URL http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1364661317302164. Tong Bu, Wei Fang, Jianhao Ding, PENGLIN DAI, Zhaofei Yu, and Tiejun Huang. Optimal ANN- SNN conversion for high-accuracy and ultra-low-latency spiking neural networks. InInternational Conference on Learning Representations,

work page doi:10.1016/j.tics.2017.09.013 2017
[4]

Manon Dampfhoffer, Thomas Mesquida, Alexandre Valentian, and Lorena Anghel

URL https://openreview.net/forum?id= 7B3IJMM1k_M. Manon Dampfhoffer, Thomas Mesquida, Alexandre Valentian, and Lorena Anghel. Investigating current-based and gating approaches for accurate and energy-efficient spiking recurrent neural networks. In Elias Pimenidis, Plamen Angelov, Chrisina Jayne, Antonios Papaleonidas, and Mehmet Aydin, editors,Artificial ...

2022
[5]

10 W. Fang, Z. Yu, Y . Chen, T. Masquelier, T. Huang, and Y . Tian. Incorporating learnable mem- brane time constant to enhance learning of spiking neural networks. In2021 IEEE/CVF In- ternational Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), pages 2641–2651, Los Alamitos, CA, USA, oct 2021a. IEEE Computer Society. doi: 10.1109/ICCV48922.2021.00266. URL https://d...

work page doi:10.1109/iccv48922.2021.00266 2021
[6]

nuScenes: A multimodal dataset for autonomous driving,

IEEE Computer Society. doi: 10.1109/CVPR42600.2020.01357. URL https: //doi.ieeecomputersociety.org/10.1109/CVPR42600.2020.01357. Xiang He, Yang Li, Dongcheng Zhao, Qingqun Kong, and Yi Zeng. Msat: Biologically inspired multi-stage adaptive threshold for conversion of spiking neural networks,

work page doi:10.1109/cvpr42600.2020.01357 2020
[7]

doi: 10.1162/089976606775093882

doi: 10.1162/089976606775093882. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/ 089976606775093882. P König, A K Engel, and W Singer. Integrator or coincidence detector? The role of the cortical neuron revisited.Trends Neurosci, 19(4):130–7.,

work page doi:10.1162/089976606775093882
[8]

doi: 10.1006/inco.1999.2806

ISSN 08905401. doi: 10.1006/inco.1999.2806. Balázs Mészáros, James C Knight, and Thomas Nowotny. Efficient event-based delay learning in spiking neural networks.Nature Communications, 16(1):10422,

work page doi:10.1006/inco.1999.2806 1999
[9]

Nicolas Perez-Nieves, Vincent C

doi: 10.1109/ISCAS46773.2023.10181778. Nicolas Perez-Nieves, Vincent C. H. Leung, Pier Luigi Dragotti, and Dan F. M. Goodman. Neu- ral heterogeneity promotes robust learning.Nature Communications, 12(1):5791, Oct

work page doi:10.1109/iscas46773.2023.10181778 2023
[10]

Nature Communications12(1), 5791 (Oct 2021).https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-26022-3,https://doi.org/ 10.1038/s41467-021-26022-3

ISSN 2041-1723. doi: 10.1038/s41467-021-26022-3. URL https://doi.org/10.1038/ s41467-021-26022-3. Alexandre Queant, Ulysse Rançon, Benoit R Cottereau, and Timothée Masquelier. DelRec: Learning delays in recurrent spiking neural networks,

work page doi:10.1038/s41467-021-26022-3 2041
[11]

doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2482-11.2011

ISSN 1529-2401. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2482-11.2011. URL http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/ 22114286. Erik Sadovsky, Maros Jakubec, and Roman Jarina. Speech command recognition based on con- volutional spiking neural networks. In2023 33rd International Conference Radioelektronika (RADIOELEKTRONIKA), pages 1–5,

work page doi:10.1523/jneurosci.2482-11.2011 2011
[12]

In: 2023 33rd International Conference Ra- dioelektronika (RADIOELEKTRONIKA)

doi: 10.1109/RADIOELEKTRONIKA57919.2023. 10109082. Sumit Bam Shrestha and Garrick Orchard. SLAYER: Spike layer error reassignment in time. In S. Bengio, H. Wallach, H. Larochelle, K. Grauman, N. Cesa-Bianchi, and R. Garnett, editors,Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 31, pages 1419–1428. Curran Associates, Inc.,

work page doi:10.1109/radioelektronika57919.2023 2023
[13]

Pengfei Sun, Yansong Chua, Paul Devos, and Dick Botteldooren

URL http://papers.nips.cc/paper/ 7415-slayer-spike-layer-error-reassignment-in-time.pdf. Pengfei Sun, Yansong Chua, Paul Devos, and Dick Botteldooren. Learnable axonal delay in spik- ing neural networks improves spoken word recognition.Frontiers in Neuroscience, 17, 2023a. ISSN 1662-453X. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2023.1275944. URL https://www.frontiersin.org/ a...

work page doi:10.3389/fnins.2023.1275944 2023
[14]

Delay-DSGN: A Dynamic Spiking Graph Neural Network with Delay Mechanisms for Evolving Graph.arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.18347,

Zhiqiang Wang, Jianghao Wen, and Jianqing Liang. Delay-DSGN: A Dynamic Spiking Graph Neural Network with Delay Mechanisms for Evolving Graph.arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.18347,

work page arXiv
[15]

Nature Machine Intelligence 3(10), 905–913 (Oct 2021).https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-021-00397-w, https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-021-00397-w

doi: 10.1038/ s42256-021-00397-w. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-021-00397-w. Chengting Yu, Zheming Gu, Da Li, Gaoang Wang, Aili Wang, and Erping Li. Stsc-snn: Spatio- temporal synaptic connection with temporal convolution and attention for spiking neural networks. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 16,

work page doi:10.1038/s42256-021-00397-w
[16]

doi: 10.3389/fnins.2022.1079357

ISSN 1662-453X. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2022.1079357. URL https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnins.2022.1079357. Chenlin Zhou, Liutao Yu, Zhaokun Zhou, Han Zhang, Zhengyu Ma, Huihui Zhou, and Yonghong Tian. Spikingformer: Spike-driven residual learning for transformer-based spiking neural network. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.11954, 2023a. URLhttps://ar...

work page doi:10.3389/fnins.2022.1079357 2022
[17]

Among the S-shaped curves, Arctan performs worse

The results indicate that bounded S-shaped functions like Tanh and Sigmoid generally outperform the unbounded function ReLU, as unbounded delays under extreme congestion might lead to excessive temporal shifts, potentially disrupting the causal structure of event sequences. Among the S-shaped curves, Arctan performs worse. We attribute this to the gradien...

work page arXiv