ArticlePNAS nexus2023
Prediction in cultured cortical neural networks.
Article in PNAS nexus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Analyzing an organism's sensors using Maximum Entropy (MaxEnt) models with bias, variance, and confusion matrices.PloS one · 2026Article
- Ex vivo cortical circuits learn to predict and spontaneously replay temporal patterns.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Repetitive training enhances the pattern recognition capability of cultured neural networks.PLoS computational biology · 2025Article
- Prediction of future input explains lateral connectivity in primary visual cortex.Current biology : CB · 2025Article
- Deviance detection and regularity sensitivity in dissociated neuronal cultures.Frontiers in neural circuits · 2025Article
- Revealing single-neuron and network-activity interaction by combining high-density microelectrode array and optogenetics.Nature communications · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Theory suggest that networks of neurons may predict their input. Prediction may underlie most aspects of information processing and is believed to be involved in motor and cognitive control and decision-making. Retinal cells have been shown to be capable of predicting visual stimuli, and there is some evidence for prediction of input in the visual cortex and hippocampus. However, there is no proof that the ability to predict is a generic feature of neural networks. We investigated whether random in vitro neuronal networks can predict stimulation, and how prediction is related to short- and long-term memory. To answer these questions, we applied two different stimulation modalities. Focal electrical stimulation has been shown to induce long-term memory traces, whereas global optogenetic stimulation did not. We used mutual information to quantify how much activity recorded from these networks reduces the uncertainty of upcoming stimuli (prediction) or recent past stimuli (short-term memory). Cortical neural networks did predict future stimuli, with the majority of all predictive information provided by the immediate network response to the stimulus. Interestingly, prediction strongly depended on short-term memory of recent sensory inputs during focal as well as global stimulation. However, prediction required less short-term memory during focal stimulation. Furthermore, the dependency on short-term memory decreased during 20 h of focal stimulation, when long-term connectivity changes were induced. These changes are fundamental for long-term memory formation, suggesting that besides short-term memory the formation of long-term memory traces may play a role in efficient prediction.
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.