ArticlePLoS computational biology2025
Cortical networks with multiple interneuron types generate oscillatory patterns during predictive coding.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ontology-constrained multi-LLM scoring of hypothesis support in the predictive processing literature.Research square · 2026Article
- A mean-field model of neural networks with PV and SOM interneurons reveals connectivity-based mechanisms of gamma oscillations.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
- Article
- A genetic algorithm for self-supervised models of oscillatory neurodynamics.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- A hierarchical multiscale model of forward and backward alpha-band traveling waves in the visual system.PLoS computational biology · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Predictive coding (PC) proposes that our brains work as an inference machine, generating an internal model of the world and minimizing predictions errors (i.e., differences between external sensory evidence and internal prediction signals). Theoretical models of PC often rely on high-level approaches, and therefore implementations detailing which neurons or pathways are used to compute prediction errors or adapt the internal representations, as well as their level of agreement with biological circuitry, are currently missing. Here we propose a computational model of PC, which integrates a neuroanatomically informed hierarchy of two cortical areas with a simplified laminar organization and cell-type-specific connectivity between excitatory, PV, SST and VIP cells. Our model efficiently performs PC, even in the presence of external and internal noise, by forming latent representations of naturalistic visual input (MNIST, fashion-MNIST and grayscale CIFAR-10) via Hebbian learning and using them to predict sensory input by minimizing prediction errors. The model assumes that both positive and negative prediction errors are computed by stereotypical excitatory-PV-SST-VIP circuits with the same structure but different incoming input. During sensory inference, neural oscillatory activity emerges in the system due to interactions between representation and prediction error microcircuits, with optogenetics-inspired inactivation protocols revealing a differentiated role of PV, SST and VIP cell types in such dynamics. Finally, our model shows anomalous responses to deviant stimuli within series of same-image presentations, in agreement with experimental results on mismatch negativity and oddball paradigms. We argue that our model constitutes an important step to better understand the circuits mediating PC in real cortical networks.
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.