Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25761744›Full record

ArticleJournal of computational neuroscience2015

Granger causality-based synaptic weights estimation for analyzing neuronal networks.

Pei-Chiang Shao, Jian-Jia Huang, Wei-Chang Shann, Chen-Tung Yen, Meng-Li Tsai, Chien-Chang Yen

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of computational neuroscience, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

6 authors.

Pei-Chiang ShaoDepartment of Mathematics, National Central University, Jhongli, 32001, Taiwan.
Jian-Jia Huang
Wei-Chang Shann
Chen-Tung Yen
Meng-Li Tsai
Chien-Chang Yen

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Granger causality (GC) analysis has emerged as a powerful analytical method for estimating the causal relationship among various types of neural activity data. However, two problems remain not very clear and further researches are needed: (1) The GC measure is designed to be nonnegative in its original form, lacking of the trait for differentiating the effects of excitations and inhibitions between neurons. (2) How is the estimated causality related to the underlying synaptic weights? Based on the GC, we propose a computational algorithm under a best linear predictor assumption for analyzing neuronal networks by estimating the synaptic weights among them. Under this assumption, the GC analysis can be extended to measure both excitatory and inhibitory effects between neurons. The method was examined by three sorts of simulated networks: those with linear, almost linear, and nonlinear network structures. The method was also illustrated to analyze real spike train data from the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) and the striatum (STR). The results showed, under the quinpirole administration, the significant existence of excitatory effects inside the ACC, excitatory effects from the ACC to the STR, and inhibitory effects inside the STR.

Indexed as

Neural Networks, ComputerAction PotentialsAlgorithmsCausalityComputer SimulationCorpus StriatumElectrophysiological PhenomenaGyrus CinguliHumansLinear ModelsModels, NeurologicalNonlinear DynamicsSynapses

Identifiers

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.