ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2026
Synaptic Plasticity as a Function of the Temporal Derivative.
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.
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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
A major outstanding question in neuroscience is whether the neocortex uses the same powerful learning algorithm as current AI models: error backpropagation. One way this could be accomplished is as a function of the temporal derivative (i.e., differences in neural activity states over time), which can closely approximate the backpropagated error gradient. We tested the hypothesis that the direction of synaptic plasticity is a function of the temporal derivative in synaptic activity over the course of a 200 ms (5 Hz) theta cycle. Using mouse hippocampal slices, we drove presynaptic activity across the two 100 ms halves of a 200 ms window at either 25 Hz or 50 Hz, combined with corresponding low and high magnitudes of postsynaptic depolarization, testing all four 2x2 combinations of these low and high activity levels, while measuring the resulting effects on synaptic efficacy (as measured by EPSP amplitude to standard test probes). Consistent with the computational hypothesis, a positive temporal derivative (low to high) resulted in LTP (increased synaptic strength), while a negative temporal derivative (high to low) resulted in LTD. Critically, both no-change conditions (stable low or high across 200 ms) resulted in no net synaptic change, even though the high no-change condition had the highest overall synaptic activity levels. Possible biochemical mechanisms that could support these results are discussed.
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.