MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407750580 · doi:10.3390/e27020215

Control of Inhibition-Stabilized Oscillations in Wilson-Cowan Networks with Homeostatic Plasticity

2025· article· en· W4407750580 on OpenAlexaff
C. Godin, Matthew R. Krause, Pedro G. Vieira, Christopher C. Pack, Jean‐Philippe Thivierge

Bibliographic record

VenueEntropy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeurosciencePhysicsHomeostatic plasticityInhibitory postsynaptic potentialExcitatory postsynaptic potentialAsynchronous communicationExcitationPlasticitySynaptic plasticityStatistical physicsControl theory (sociology)Computer scienceChemistryPsychologyMetaplasticityQuantum mechanicsControl (management)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Interactions between excitatory and inhibitory neurons in the cerebral cortex give rise to different regimes of activity and modulate brain oscillations. A prominent regime in the cortex is the inhibition-stabilized network (ISN), defined by strong recurrent excitation balanced by inhibition. While theoretical models have captured the response of brain circuits in the ISN state, their connectivity is typically hard-wired, leaving unanswered how a network may self-organize to an ISN state and dynamically switch between ISN and non-ISN states to modulate oscillations. Here, we introduce a mean-rate model of coupled Wilson-Cowan equations, link ISN and non-ISN states to Kolmogorov-Sinai entropy, and demonstrate how homeostatic plasticity (HP) allows the network to express both states depending on its level of tonic activity. This mechanism enables the model to capture a broad range of experimental effects, including (i) a paradoxical decrease in inhibitory activity, (ii) a phase offset between excitation and inhibition, and (iii) damped gamma oscillations. Further, the model accounts for experimental work on asynchronous quenching, where an external input suppresses intrinsic oscillations. Together, findings show that oscillatory activity is modulated by the dynamical regime of the network under the control of HP, thus advancing a framework that bridges neural dynamics, entropy, oscillations, and synaptic plasticity.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.739
Threshold uncertainty score0.309

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.225
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 teacher head, 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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEntropySame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207