Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38562505›Full record

ArticleHeliyon2024

A general description of criticality in neural network models.

Longbin Zeng, Jianfeng Feng, Wenlian Lu

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Longbin ZengInstitute of Science and Technology for Brain-Inspired Intelligence, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Jianfeng FengInstitute of Science and Technology for Brain-Inspired Intelligence, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Wenlian LuShanghai Center for Mathematical Sciences, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent experimental observations have supported the hypothesis that the cerebral cortex operates in a dynamical regime near criticality, where the neuronal network exhibits a mixture of ordered and disordered patterns. However, A comprehensive study of how criticality emerges and how to reproduce it is still lacking. In this study, we investigate coupled networks with conductance-based neurons and illustrate the co-existence of different spiking patterns, including asynchronous irregular (AI) firing and synchronous regular (SR) state, along with a scale-invariant neuronal avalanche phenomenon (criticality). We show that fast-acting synaptic coupling can evoke neuronal avalanches in the mean-dominated regime but has little effect in the fluctuation-dominated regime. In a narrow region of parameter space, the network exhibits avalanche dynamics with power-law avalanche size and duration distributions. We conclude that three stages which may be responsible for reproducing the synchronized bursting: mean-dominated subthreshold dynamics, fast-initiating a spike event, and time-delayed inhibitory cancellation. Remarkably, we illustrate the mechanisms underlying critical avalanches in the presence of noise, which can be explained as a stochastic crossing state around the Hopf bifurcation under the mean-dominated regime. Moreover, we apply the ensemble Kalman filter to determine and track effective connections for the neuronal network. The method is validated on noisy synthetic BOLD signals and could exactly reproduce the corresponding critical network activity. Our results provide a special perspective to understand and model the criticality, which can be useful for large-scale modeling and computation of brain dynamics.

Indexed as

BifurcationCriticalityEnsemble Kalman filterNeuronal avalanches

Identifiers

PMID38562505
PMCPMC10982970

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.