ArticleScientific reports2025
Feature selective inhibitory mechanisms enable expectation suppression in cortical microcircuits.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Expectation suppression (ES) refers to the attenuation of neural responses when sensory inputs align with prior predictions, reflecting a core principle of efficient neural coding. To investigate the circuit-level mechanisms underlying ES, we developed a biologically inspired computational model incorporating excitatory pyramidal cells (PCs) and three major types of inhibitory interneurons: parvalbumin-expressing (PV), somatostatin-expressing (SOM), and vasoactive intestinal peptide-expressing (VIP) neurons. The model included stimulus-selective tuning in both excitatory and inhibitory populations and implemented experience-dependent synaptic plasticity. Our results revealed that SOM neurons mediated feature-specific dendritic inhibition of PCs under expected conditions, selectively suppressing responses to predicted inputs. Conversely, VIP neurons facilitated disinhibition by inhibiting PV neurons, thereby enhancing PC responsiveness under unexpected conditions. These dynamic roles arise from their distinct connectivity profiles and synaptic weight adaptations following training. Crucially, stimulus selectivity in SOM and VIP neurons was essential for precise modulation: without it, inhibitory control became diffuse and inefficient. In contrast, PV neurons provided broad, non-selective inhibition across PC populations, serving as a stable baseline for prediction-dependent modulation. Together, these findings demonstrated how interneuron diversity, synaptic plasticity, and tuning specificity interacted to implement ES in a prediction-sensitive manner.
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.