ArticlePLoS computational biology2015
Identifying and tracking simulated synaptic inputs from neuronal firing: insights from in vitro experiments.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Toward reliable machine learning models for neural circuit inference: A diagnostic study of CNNs on spike trains.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
- Ensemble learning and ground-truth validation of synaptic connectivity inferred from spike trains.PLoS computational biology · 2024Article
- Uncovering hidden network architecture from spiking activities using an exact statistical input-output relation of neurons.Communications biology · 2023Article
- A convolutional neural network for estimating synaptic connectivity from spike trains.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Article
- Inferring and validating mechanistic models of neural microcircuits based on spike-train data.Nature communications · 2019Article
- Reconstructing neuronal circuitry from parallel spike trains.Nature communications · 2019Article
- EXACT SPIKE TRAIN INFERENCE VIA ℓThe annals of applied statistics · 2018Article
- Estimating short-term synaptic plasticity from pre- and postsynaptic spiking.PLoS computational biology · 2017Article
- Complete Firing-Rate Response of Neurons with Complex Intrinsic Dynamics.PLoS computational biology · 2015Article
- Efficient "Shotgun" Inference of Neural Connectivity from Highly Sub-sampled Activity Data.PLoS computational biology · 2015Article
- Injection of fully-defined signal mixtures: a novel high-throughput tool to study neuronal encoding and computations.PloS one · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Accurately describing synaptic interactions between neurons and how interactions change over time are key challenges for systems neuroscience. Although intracellular electrophysiology is a powerful tool for studying synaptic integration and plasticity, it is limited by the small number of neurons that can be recorded simultaneously in vitro and by the technical difficulty of intracellular recording in vivo. One way around these difficulties may be to use large-scale extracellular recording of spike trains and apply statistical methods to model and infer functional connections between neurons. These techniques have the potential to reveal large-scale connectivity structure based on the spike timing alone. However, the interpretation of functional connectivity is often approximate, since only a small fraction of presynaptic inputs are typically observed. Here we use in vitro current injection in layer 2/3 pyramidal neurons to validate methods for inferring functional connectivity in a setting where input to the neuron is controlled. In experiments with partially-defined input, we inject a single simulated input with known amplitude on a background of fluctuating noise. In a fully-defined input paradigm, we then control the synaptic weights and timing of many simulated presynaptic neurons. By analyzing the firing of neurons in response to these artificial inputs, we ask 1) How does functional connectivity inferred from spikes relate to simulated synaptic input? and 2) What are the limitations of connectivity inference? We find that individual current-based synaptic inputs are detectable over a broad range of amplitudes and conditions. Detectability depends on input amplitude and output firing rate, and excitatory inputs are detected more readily than inhibitory. Moreover, as we model increasing numbers of presynaptic inputs, we are able to estimate connection strengths more accurately and detect the presence of connections more quickly. These results illustrate the possibilities and outline the limits of inferring synaptic input from spikes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.