ArticlePLoS computational biology2025
Synchrony, oscillations, and phase relationships in collective neuronal activity: A highly comparative overview of methods.
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 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.
- Quantifying spike train synchrony and directionality: Measures and Applications.Biological cybernetics · 2026Review
- Digital Twin Brain simulation and manipulation of a functional brain network underlying mental illness.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Neuronal activity is organized in collective patterns that are critical for information coding, generation, and communication between neural populations. These patterns are often described in terms of synchrony, oscillations, and phase relationships. Many methods have been proposed for the quantification of these collective states of dynamic neuronal organization. However, it is difficult to determine which method is best suited for which experimental setting and research question. This choice is further complicated by the fact that most methods are sensitive to a combination of synchrony, oscillations, and other factors; in addition, some of them display systematic biases that can complicate their interpretation. To address these challenges, we adopt a highly comparative approach, whereby spike trains are represented by a diverse library of measures. This enables unsupervised or supervised analysis in the space of measures, or in that of spike trains. We compile a battery of 122 measures of synchrony, oscillations, and phase relationships, complemented with 9 measures of spiking intensity and variability. We first apply them to sets of synthetic spike trains with known statistical properties, and show that all measures are confounded by extraneous factors such as firing rate or population frequency, but to different extents. Then, we analyze spike trains recorded in different species-rat, mouse, and monkey-and brain areas-primary sensory cortices and hippocampus-and show that our highly comparative approach provides a high-dimensional quantification of collective network activity that can be leveraged for both unsupervised and supervised characterization of firing patterns. Overall, the highly comparative approach provides a detailed description of the empirical properties of multineuron spike train analysis methods, including practical guidelines for their use in experimental settings, and advances our understanding of neuronal coordination and coding.
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.