Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26657024›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2015

Computing the Local Field Potential (LFP) from Integrate-and-Fire Network Models.

Alberto Mazzoni, Henrik Lindén, Hermann Cuntz, Anders Lansner, Stefano Panzeri, Gaute T Einevoll

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 112 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
112citing 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

112 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Distinct laminar origins of sensory-evoked high-gamma and low-frequency ECoG signals revealed by optogenetics.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. A Python toolbox for neural circuit parameter inference.NPJ systems biology and applications · 2025
    Article

52 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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.

Alberto MazzoniThe Biorobotics Institute, Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna, Pontedera, Pisa, Italy.
Henrik LindénDepartment of Neuroscience and Pharmacology, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Hermann CuntzErnst Strüngmann Institute (ESI) for Neuroscience in Cooperation with Max Planck Society, Frankfurt/Main, Germany.
Anders LansnerDepartment of Computational Biology, School of Computer Science and Communication, Royal Institute of Technology-KTH, Stockholm, Sweden.
Stefano PanzeriNeural Computation Laboratory, Center for Neuroscience and Cognitive Systems @UniTn, Istituto Italiano di Tecnologia, Rovereto, Italy.
Gaute T EinevollDepartment of Mathematical Sciences and Technology, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Ås, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Leaky integrate-and-fire (LIF) network models are commonly used to study how the spiking dynamics of neural networks changes with stimuli, tasks or dynamic network states. However, neurophysiological studies in vivo often rather measure the mass activity of neuronal microcircuits with the local field potential (LFP). Given that LFPs are generated by spatially separated currents across the neuronal membrane, they cannot be computed directly from quantities defined in models of point-like LIF neurons. Here, we explore the best approximation for predicting the LFP based on standard output from point-neuron LIF networks. To search for this best "LFP proxy", we compared LFP predictions from candidate proxies based on LIF network output (e.g, firing rates, membrane potentials, synaptic currents) with "ground-truth" LFP obtained when the LIF network synaptic input currents were injected into an analogous three-dimensional (3D) network model of multi-compartmental neurons with realistic morphology, spatial distributions of somata and synapses. We found that a specific fixed linear combination of the LIF synaptic currents provided an accurate LFP proxy, accounting for most of the variance of the LFP time course observed in the 3D network for all recording locations. This proxy performed well over a broad set of conditions, including substantial variations of the neuronal morphologies. Our results provide a simple formula for estimating the time course of the LFP from LIF network simulations in cases where a single pyramidal population dominates the LFP generation, and thereby facilitate quantitative comparison between computational models and experimental LFP recordings in vivo.

Indexed as

Models, NeurologicalAction PotentialsBrainBrain MappingComputer SimulationElectromagnetic FieldsHumansMembrane PotentialsNerve NetNeuronsSynaptic Transmission

Identifiers

PMID26657024
PMCPMC4682791

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.