| Title |
Challenges of understanding brain function by selective modulation of neuronal subpopulations
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Trends in Neurosciences, July 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.tins.2013.06.005 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Arvind Kumar, Ioannis Vlachos, Ad Aertsen, Clemens Boucsein |
| Abstract |
Neuronal networks confront researchers with an overwhelming complexity of interactions between their elements. A common approach to understanding neuronal processing is to reduce complexity by defining subunits and infer their functional role by selectively modulating them. However, this seemingly straightforward approach may lead to confusing results if the network exhibits parallel pathways leading to recurrent connectivity. We demonstrate limits of the selective modulation approach and argue that, even though highly successful in some instances, the approach fails in networks with complex connectivity. We argue to refine experimental techniques by carefully considering the structural features of the neuronal networks involved. Such methods could dramatically increase the effectiveness of selective modulation and may lead to a mechanistic understanding of principles underlying brain function. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 198 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 10 | 5% |
| France | 4 | 2% |
| Germany | 4 | 2% |
| Japan | 3 | 2% |
| Switzerland | 2 | 1% |
| China | 2 | 1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Russia | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 3 | 2% |
| Unknown | 167 | 84% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 54 | 27% |
| Researcher | 48 | 24% |
| Student > Master | 22 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 16 | 8% |
| Professor | 15 | 8% |
| Other | 28 | 14% |
| Unknown | 15 | 8% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 67 | 34% |
| Neuroscience | 47 | 24% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 7% |
| Psychology | 13 | 7% |
| Engineering | 12 | 6% |
| Other | 26 | 13% |
| Unknown | 19 | 10% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 August 2013.
All research outputs
#2,089,162
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Trends in Neurosciences
#520
of 2,483 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,475
of 208,348 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Trends in Neurosciences
#6
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,483 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 208,348 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.