MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3112687648 · doi:10.1101/2020.12.17.423201

A unified theory of E/I synaptic balance, quasicritical neuronal avalanches and asynchronous irregular spiking

2020· preprint· en· W3112687648 on OpenAlexafffund
Mauricio Girardi‐Schappo, Emilio F. Galera, Tawan T. A. Carvalho, Ludmila Brochini, Nilton L. Kamiji, Antônio C. Roque, Osame Kinouchi

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFundação de Amparo à Ciência e Tecnologia do Estado de PernambucoConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo
KeywordsAsynchronous communicationBalance (ability)NeuroscienceAdaptation (eye)Homeostatic plasticityDetailed balanceComputer sciencePhysicsStatistical physicsSynaptic plasticityPsychologyBiologyTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Neuronal avalanches and asynchronous irregular (AI) firing patterns have been thought to represent distinct frameworks to understand the brain spontaneous activity. The former is typically present in systems where there is a balance between the slow accumulation of tension and its fast dissipation, whereas the latter is accompanied by the balance between synaptic excitation and inhibition (E/I). Here, we develop a new theory of E/I balance that relies on two homeostatic adaptation mechanisms: the short-term depression of inhibition and the spike-dependent threshold increase. First, we turn off the adaptation and show that the so-called static system has a typical critical point commonly attributed to self-organized critical models. Then, we turn on the adaptation and show that the network evolves to a dynamic regime in which: (I) E/I synapses balance regardless of any parameter choice; (II) an AI firing pattern emerges; and (III) neuronal avalanches display power laws. This is the first time that these three phenomena appear simultaneously in the same network activity. Thus, we show that the once thought opposing frameworks may be unified into a single dynamics, provided that adaptation mechanisms are in place. In our model, the AI firing pattern is a direct consequence of the hovering close to the critical line where external inputs are compensated by threshold growth, creating synaptic balance for any E/I weight ratio. Highlights Asynchronous irregular (AI) firing happens together with power-law neuronal avalanches under self-organized synaptic balance. Self-organization towards the critical and balanced state (with AI and power-law avalanches) occur via short-term inhibition depression and firing threshold adaptation. The avalanche exponents match experimental findings. The adaptation time scales drive the self-organized dynamics towards different firing regimes. Author summary Two competing frameworks are employed to understand the brain spontaneous activity, both of which are backed by computational and experimental evidence: globally asynchronous and locally irregular (AI) activity arises in excitatory/inhibitory balanced networks subjected to external stimuli, whereas avalanche activity emerge in excitable systems on the critical point between active and inactive states. Here, we develop a new theory for E/I networks and show that there is a state where synaptic balance coexists with AI firing and power-law distributed neuronal avalanches. This regime is achieved through the introducing of short-term depression of inhibitory synapses and spike-dependent threshold adaptation. Thus, the system self-organizes towards the balance point, such that its AI activity arises from quasicritical fluctuations. The need for two independent adaptive mechanisms explains why different dynamical states are observed in the brain.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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