Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41889922›Full record

ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2026

A novel framework for expanding RNNs with biophysical detail to solve cognitive tasks.

Nicholas Tolley, Stephanie Jones

Abstract readPreprint
In one paragraph

Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Nicholas TolleyDepartment of Neuroscience, Brown University, Providence, RI, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-0358-0074
Stephanie JonesDepartment of Neuroscience, Brown University, Providence, RI, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-6760-5301

Funding

Dissemination of the Human Neocortical Neurosolver (HNN) software for circuit level interpretation of human MEG/EEGU24NS129945 · NINDS · BROWN UNIVERSITY · PI STEPHANIE Ruggiano JONES · 2023 to 2026
$2.8M
NINDS NIH HHS U24 NS129945
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recurrent neural networks (RNNs) have proven to be highly successful in emulating human-like cognitive functions such as working memory. In recent years, RNNs are evolving to incorporate more biophysical realism to produce more plausible predictions on how cognitive tasks are solved in real neural circuits. However, there are major challenges in constructing and training networks with the complex and nonlinear properties of real neurons. A major component of the success of RNNs is that they share the same mathematical base as deep neural networks, permitting highly efficient optimization of model parameters using standard deep learning techniques. To do so, they use abstract representations of neurons which fail to capture the impact of cell-level biophysical and morphologic properties that may benefit network-level function. Expanding task-trained RNNs with biophysical properties such as dendrites and active ionic currents poses substantial challenges, as it moves these models away from the validated training regimes known to be highly effective for RNNs. To address this gap, we developed a biophysically detailed reservoir computing (BRC) framework with the goal of extracting mechanistic insights from biophysical neural models, and propose that these insights can be used to guide model choices that will work for specific categories of cognitive tasks. The BRC network was constructed with synaptically coupled excitatory and inhibitory cells, in which the excitatory cells include multicompartment biophysically active dendrites; motivated by empirical studies suggesting dendrites have desirable computational benefits (e.g. pattern classification and coincidence detection). We trained the BRC network to do a simplified working memory task where it had to maintain the representation of an extrinsic "cue" input. We studied the impact of extrinsic input time constants (fast AMPA vs slow NMDA) and location (dendrite vs soma) on the ability of a network to solve the task. Our results revealed that cue inputs through NMDA receptors are particularly efficient for solving the working memory task. Further, the properties of NMDA receptors are uniquely suited for cue inputs delivered at the dendrite, as networks trained with dendritic AMPA cue inputs failed to solve the task. Detailed examination of the cell and network dynamics that solve the task reveals distinct local network configurations and computing principles for the different types of extrinsic input. Overall, much like the body of mechanistic insights that have underpinned the success of training RNNs, this study lays the groundwork for applying the BRC framework to train biophysically detailed neural models to solve complex human-like cognitive tasks.

Identifiers

PMID41889922
PMCPMC13015532

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.