Functional Subtypes of Synaptic Dynamics in Mouse and Human
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Synapses show preferential responses to particular temporal patterns of activity. Across individual synapses, there is a large degree of response heterogeneity that is informally or tacitly separated into classes, and typically only two: facilitating and depressing short-term plasticity. Here we combined a kernel-based model and machine learning techniques to infer the number and the characteristics of functionally distinct subtypes of short-term synaptic dynamics in a large dataset of glutamatergic cortical connections. To this end, we took two independent approaches. First, we used unsupervised techniques to group similar synapses into clusters. Second, we used supervised prediction of cell subclasses to reveal features of synaptic dynamics that characterized cellular genetic profiles. In rodent data, we found five clusters with a remarkable degree of convergence with the transgenic-associated subtypes. Two of these clusters corresponded to different degrees of facilitation, two corresponded to depression with different degrees of variability and one corresponded to depression-then-facilitation. Strikingly, the application of the same clustering method in human data inferred highly similar clusters to those observed in rodents, supportive of a stable clustering procedure and suggesting a homology of functional subtypes across species. This nuanced dictionary of functional subtypes shapes the heterogeneity of cortical synaptic dynamics and provides a lens into the basic motifs of information transmission 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 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".