ArticlePLoS computational biology2026
Population sparseness determines strength of Hebbian plasticity for maximal memory lifetime in associative networks.
Article in PLoS computational 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The brain can efficiently learn and form memories based on limited exposure to stimuli, often even in single trials. Two key factors are believed to support this ability: large synaptic plasticity to strongly encode new memories; and sparse coding, leading to low overlap between memory representations and to small interference. Therefore, increased sparseness can also improve memory capacity. However, it is not well understood how the strength of plasticity of synapses affects capacity. Here, we analyze the combined impact of population sparseness and strength of plasticity on memory capacity. Specifically, we explore how the strength of plasticity that maximizes capacity depends on the sparseness of the neural code. To this end, we study a feedforward network with Hebbian and homeostatic plasticity and a two-state synapse model. The network learns to associate sparse binary input-output pattern pairs. The strength of plasticity is modeled as the probability of synaptic changes. Our results are based on both network simulations and an analytical theory, predicting the expected memory capacity in dependence on strength of plasticity and population sparseness. For both perfect and noisy input patterns, we find that the optimal strength of plasticity increases with increasing pattern sparseness and that this effect is more pronounced for input than for output sparseness. Interestingly, the optimal strength of plasticity remains the same across different network sizes if the number of active units in an input pattern is constant. While the memory capacity obtained at the optimal strength of plasticity increases monotonically with output sparseness, its dependence on input sparseness is non-monotonic. Overall, we provide the first detailed investigation of the interactions between population sparseness, strength of plasticity, and memory capacity. Our findings suggest that differences in sparseness between brain regions may underlie observed differences in how strongly these regions adapt and how quickly they learn.
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.