Assemblies, synapse clustering, and network topology interact with plasticity to explain structure-function relationships of the cortical connectome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Synaptic plasticity underlies the brain's ability to learn and adapt. While experiments in brain slices have revealed mechanisms and protocols for the induction of plasticity between pairs of neurons, how these synaptic changes are coordinated in biological neuronal networks to ensure the emergence of learning remains poorly understood. Simulation and modeling have emerged as important tools to study learning in plastic networks, but have yet to achieve a scale that incorporates realistic network structure, active dendrites, and multi-synapse interactions, key determinants of synaptic plasticity. To rise to this challenge, we endowed an existing large-scale cortical network model, incorporating data-constrained dendritic processing and multi-synaptic connections, with a calcium-based model of functional plasticity that captures the diversity of excitatory connections extrapolated to in vivo-like conditions. This allowed us to study how dendrites and network structure interact with plasticity to shape stimulus representations at the microcircuit level. In our exploratory simulations, plasticity acted sparsely and specifically, firing rates and weight distributions remained stable without additional homeostatic mechanisms. At the circuit level, we found plasticity was driven by co-firing stimulus-evoked functional assemblies, spatial clustering of synapses on dendrites, and the topology of the network connectivity. As a result of the plastic changes, the network became more reliable with more stimulus-specific responses. We confirmed our testable predictions in the MICrONS datasets, an openly available electron microscopic reconstruction of a large volume of cortical tissue. Our results quantify at a large scale how the dendritic architecture and higher-order structure of cortical microcircuits play a central role in functional plasticity and provide a foundation for elucidating their role in learning.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".