Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39670259›Full record

ArticlePNAS nexus2024

Continuous Quasi-Attractors dissolve with too much - or too little - variability.

Francesca Schönsberg, Rémi Monasson, Alessandro Treves

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PNAS nexus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

3 authors.

Francesca SchönsbergLaboratory of Physics of the Ecole Normale Supérieure, PSL and CNRS UMR8023, Sorbonne Université, Paris 75005, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8036-2946
Rémi MonassonLaboratory of Physics of the Ecole Normale Supérieure, PSL and CNRS UMR8023, Sorbonne Université, Paris 75005, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4459-0204
Alessandro TrevesSISSA, Scuola Internazionale Superiore di Studi Avanzati, Cognitive Neuroscience, Trieste 34136, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7246-5673

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent research involving bats flying in long tunnels has confirmed that hippocampal place cells can be active at multiple locations, with considerable variability in place field size and peak rate. With self-organizing recurrent networks, variability implies inhomogeneity in the synaptic weights, impeding the establishment of a continuous manifold of fixed points. Are continuous attractor neural networks still valid models for understanding spatial memory in the hippocampus, given such variability? Here, we ask what are the noise limits, in terms of an experimentally inspired parametrization of the irregularity of a single map, beyond which the notion of continuous attractor is no longer relevant. Through numerical simulations we show that (i) a continuous attractor can be approximated even when neural dynamics ultimately converge onto very few fixed points, since a quasi-attractive continuous manifold supports dynamically localized activity; (ii) excess irregularity in field size however disrupts the continuity of the manifold, while too little irregularity, with multiple fields, surprisingly prevents localized activity; and (iii) the boundaries in parameter space among these three regimes, extracted from simulations, are well matched by analytical estimates. These results lead to predict that there will be a maximum size of a 1D environment which can be retained in memory, and that the replay of spatial activity during sleep or quiet wakefulness will be for short segments of the environment.

Indexed as

associative plasticityattractor dynamicsplace cellsrecurrent networksspatial memory

Identifiers

PMID39670259
PMCPMC11635835

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.