MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2936850520 · doi:10.1101/613794

Modeling implicates inhibitory network bistability as an underpinning of seizure initiation

2019· preprint· en· W2936850520 on OpenAlexafffund
Scott Rich, Homeira Moradi Chameh, Marjan Rafiee, Katie Ferguson, Frances K. Skinner, Taufik A. Valiante

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2019
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsInhibitory postsynaptic potentialNeuroscienceGABAergicBistabilityExcitatory postsynaptic potentialNerve netNetwork dynamicsMechanism (biology)EpilepsyInterneuronBiologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A plethora of recent experimental literature implicates the abrupt, synchronous activation of GABAergic interneurons in driving the sudden change in brain activity that heralds seizure initiation. However, the mechanisms predisposing an inhibitory network toward sudden coherence specifically during ictogenesis remain unknown. We address this question by comparing simulated inhibitory networks containing control interneurons and networks containing hyper-excitable interneurons modeled to mimic treatment with 4-Aminopyridine (4-AP), an agent commonly used to model seizures in vivo and in vitro . Our in silico study demonstrates that model inhibitory networks with 4-AP interneurons are more prone than their control counterparts to exist in a bistable state in which asynchronously firing networks can abruptly transition into synchrony due to a brief perturbation. We further show that perturbations driving this transition could reasonably arise in vivo based on models of background excitatory synaptic activity in the cortex. Thus, these results propose a mechanism by which an inhibitory network can transition from incoherent to coherent dynamics in a fashion that may precipitate seizure as a downstream effect. Moreover, this mechanism specifically explains why inhibitory networks containing hyper-excitable interneurons are more vulnerable to this state change, and how such networks can undergo this transition without a permanent change in the drive to the system. This, in turn, potentially explains such networks’ increased vulnerability to seizure initiated by GABAergic activity. Author summary For decades, the study of epilepsy has focused on the hypothesis that over-excitation or dis-inhibition of pyramidal neurons underlies the transition from normal brain activity to seizure. However, a variety of recent experimental findings have implicated a sudden synchronous burst of activity amongst inhibitory interneurons in driving this transition. Given the counter-intuitive nature of these findings and the correspondingly novel hypothesis of seizure generation, the articulation of a feasible mechanism of action underlying this dynamic is of paramount importance for this theory’s viability. Here, we use computational techniques, particularly the concept of bistability in the context of dynamical systems, to propose a mechanism for the necessary first step in such a process: the sudden synchronization of a network of inhibitory interneurons. This is the first detailed proposal of a computational mechanism explaining any aspect of this hypothesis of which we are aware. By articulating a mechanism that not only underlies this transition, but does so in a fashion explaining why ictogenic networks might be more prone to this behavior, we provide critical support for this novel hypothesis of seizure generation and potential insight into the larger question of why individuals with epilepsy are particularly vulnerable to seizure.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.217 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicNeural dynamics and brain function→French-language works237,207→