Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23388860›Full record

ArticleJournal of computational neuroscience2013

Impact of network topology on inference of synaptic connectivity from multi-neuronal spike data simulated by a large-scale cortical network model.

Ryota Kobayashi, Katsunori Kitano

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of computational neuroscience, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ryota KobayashiDepartment of Human and Computer Intelligence, Ritsumeikan University, 1-1-1 Nojihigashi, Kusatsu, Shiga 525-8577, Japan.
Katsunori Kitano
Ritsumeikan University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Many mechanisms of neural processing rely critically upon the synaptic connectivity between neurons. As our ability to simultaneously record from large populations of neurons expands, the ability to infer network connectivity from this data has become a major goal of computational neuroscience. To address this issue, we employed several different methods to infer synaptic connections from simulated spike data from a realistic local cortical network model. This approach allowed us to directly compare the accuracy of different methods in predicting synaptic connectivity. We compared the performance of model-free (coherence measure and transfer entropy) and model-based (coupled escape rate model) methods of connectivity inference, applying those methods to the simulated spike data from the model networks with different network topologies. Our results indicate that the accuracy of the inferred connectivity was higher for highly clustered, near regular, or small-world networks, while accuracy was lower for random networks, irrespective of which analysis method was employed. Among the employed methods, the model-based method performed best. This model performed with higher accuracy, was less sensitive to threshold changes, and required less data to make an accurate assessment of connectivity. Given that cortical connectivity tends to be highly clustered, our results outline a powerful analytical tool for inferring local synaptic connectivity from observations of spontaneous activity.

Indexed as

Computer SimulationAction PotentialsAnimalsCerebral CortexNerve NetNeuronsSynapses

Identifiers

PMID23388860
OpenAlexW2038582494

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.