ArticleFrontiers in network physiology2025
On the robustness of the emergent spatiotemporal dynamics in biophysically realistic and phenomenological whole-brain models at multiple network resolutions.
Article in Frontiers in network physiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- On the robustness of the emergent spatiotemporal dynamics in biophysically realistic and phenomenological whole-brain models at multiple network resolutions.Frontiers in network physiology · 2025Article
- Signal propagation in small networks of Hodgkin-Huxley neurons.Frontiers in network physiology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The human brain is a complex dynamical system which displays a wide range of macroscopic and mesoscopic patterns of neural activity, whose mechanistic origin remains poorly understood. Whole-brain modelling allows us to explore candidate mechanisms causing the observed patterns. However, it is not fully established how the choice of model type and the networks' spatial resolution influence the simulation results, hence, it remains unclear, to which extent conclusions drawn from these results are limited by modelling artefacts. Here, we compare the dynamics of a biophysically realistic, linear-nonlinear cascade model of whole-brain activity with a phenomenological Wilson-Cowan model using three structural connectomes based on the Schaefer parcellation scheme with 100, 200, and 500 nodes. Both neural mass models implement the same mechanistic hypotheses, which specifically address the interaction between excitation, inhibition, and a slow adaptation current which affects the excitatory populations. We quantify the emerging dynamical states in detail and investigate how consistent results are across the different model variants. Then we apply both model types to the specific phenomenon of slow oscillations, which are a prevalent brain rhythm during deep sleep. We investigate the consistency of model predictions when exploring specific mechanistic hypotheses about the effects of both short- and long-range connections and of the antero-posterior structural connectivity gradient on key properties of these oscillations. Overall, our results demonstrate that the coarse-grained dynamics is robust to changes in both model type and network resolution. In some cases, however, model predictions do not generalize. Thus, some care must be taken when interpreting model results.
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.