Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41213947›Full record

ArticleNature communications2025

Fluctuation-learning relationship in recurrent neural networks.

Tomoki Kurikawa, Kunihiko Kaneko

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature communications, 2025. 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

2 authors.

Tomoki KurikawaDepartment of Complex and Intelligent Systems, Future University Hakodate, Hakodate, Hokkaido, Japan. kurikawa@fun.ac.jp.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1475-2812
Kunihiko KanekoThe Niels Bohr Institute, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.

Funding

MEXT | Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS) 20H00123MEXT | Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS) 25H02622Novo Nordisk Fonden (Novo Nordisk Foundation) 21OC0065542
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Learning speed depends on both task structure and neural dynamics prior to learning, yet a theory connecting them has been missing. Inspired by the fluctuation-response relation, we derive two formulae linking neural dynamics to learning. Initial learning speed is proportional to the covariance between pre-learning spontaneous activity and network's input-evoked response, independent of the learning rule. For Hebb-type learning, initial speed scales with the variance of activity along target and input directions. These results apply across tasks including input-output mapping and time-series generation. Numerical simulations across diverse models validate the formulae beyond the theoretical-derivation's assumptions. Although derived for early learning, the formulae predict total learning time. A straightforward implication is learning is faster when task-relevant directions align with high-variance spontaneous activities, consistent with empirical findings. Our framework establishes how the geometrical relationship between pre-learning dynamics and task directions governs learning speed, independent of details of tasks.

Identifiers

PMID41213947
PMCPMC12603149

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.