Statistical Evaluation of Waveform Collapse Reveals Scale-Free Properties of Neuronal Avalanches
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Neural avalanches are a prominent form of brain activity characterized by network-wide bursts whose statistics follow a power-law distribution with a slope near 3/2. Recent work suggests that avalanches of different durations can be rescaled and thus collapsed together. This collapse mirrors work in statistical physics where it is proposed to form a signature of systems evolving in a critical state. However, no rigorous statistical test has been proposed to examine the degree to which neuronal avalanches collapse together. Here, we describe a statistical test based on functional data analysis, where raw avalanches are first smoothed with a Fourier basis, then rescaled using a time-warping function. Finally, an F ratio test combined with a bootstrap permutation is employed to determine if avalanches collapse together in a statistically reliable fashion. To illustrate this approach, we recorded avalanches from cortical cultures on multielectrode arrays as in previous work. Analyses show that avalanches of various durations can be collapsed together in a statistically robust fashion. However, a principal components analysis revealed that the offset of avalanches resulted in marked variance in the time-warping function, thus arguing for limitations to the strict fractal nature of avalanche dynamics. We compared these results with those obtained from cultures treated with an AMPA/NMDA receptor antagonist (APV/DNQX), which yield a power-law of avalanche durations with a slope greater than 3/2. When collapsed together, these avalanches showed marked misalignments both at onset and offset time-points. In sum, the proposed statistical evaluation suggests the presence of scale-free avalanche waveforms and constitutes an avenue for examining critical dynamics in neuronal systems.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".