Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31299044›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2019

Dimensionality in recurrent spiking networks: Global trends in activity and local origins in connectivity.

Stefano Recanatesi, Gabriel Koch Ocker, Michael A Buice, Eric Shea-Brown

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 46 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
46citing 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

46 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors.

Stefano RecanatesiCenter for Computational Neuroscience, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-3576-9261
Gabriel Koch OckerAllen Institute for Brain Science, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-9627-9576
Michael A BuiceCenter for Computational Neuroscience, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.
Eric Shea-BrownCenter for Computational Neuroscience, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The dimensionality of a network's collective activity is of increasing interest in neuroscience. This is because dimensionality provides a compact measure of how coordinated network-wide activity is, in terms of the number of modes (or degrees of freedom) that it can independently explore. A low number of modes suggests a compressed low dimensional neural code and reveals interpretable dynamics [1], while findings of high dimension may suggest flexible computations [2, 3]. Here, we address the fundamental question of how dimensionality is related to connectivity, in both autonomous and stimulus-driven networks. Working with a simple spiking network model, we derive three main findings. First, the dimensionality of global activity patterns can be strongly, and systematically, regulated by local connectivity structures. Second, the dimensionality is a better indicator than average correlations in determining how constrained neural activity is. Third, stimulus evoked neural activity interacts systematically with neural connectivity patterns, leading to network responses of either greater or lesser dimensionality than the stimulus.

Indexed as

Action PotentialsHumansModels, NeurologicalNerve Net

Identifiers

PMID31299044
PMCPMC6655892

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.