Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35714155›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2022

Metastable spiking networks in the replica-mean-field limit.

Luyan Yu, Thibaud O Taillefumier

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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.

Luyan YuDepartment of Physics, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-0953-6939
Thibaud O TaillefumierDepartment of Mathematics, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-3538-6882

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Characterizing metastable neural dynamics in finite-size spiking networks remains a daunting challenge. We propose to address this challenge in the recently introduced replica-mean-field (RMF) limit. In this limit, networks are made of infinitely many replicas of the finite network of interest, but with randomized interactions across replicas. Such randomization renders certain excitatory networks fully tractable at the cost of neglecting activity correlations, but with explicit dependence on the finite size of the neural constituents. However, metastable dynamics typically unfold in networks with mixed inhibition and excitation. Here, we extend the RMF computational framework to point-process-based neural network models with exponential stochastic intensities, allowing for mixed excitation and inhibition. Within this setting, we show that metastable finite-size networks admit multistable RMF limits, which are fully characterized by stationary firing rates. Technically, these stationary rates are determined as the solutions of a set of delayed differential equations under certain regularity conditions that any physical solutions shall satisfy. We solve this original problem by combining the resolvent formalism and singular-perturbation theory. Importantly, we find that these rates specify probabilistic pseudo-equilibria which accurately capture the neural variability observed in the original finite-size network. We also discuss the emergence of metastability as a stochastic bifurcation, which can be interpreted as a static phase transition in the RMF limits. In turn, we expect to leverage the static picture of RMF limits to infer purely dynamical features of metastable finite-size networks, such as the transition rates between pseudo-equilibria.

Indexed as

Models, NeurologicalNerve NetAction PotentialsNeural Networks, ComputerNeurons

Identifiers

PMID35714155
PMCPMC9246178

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.