↓ Skip to main content

Non-Additive Coupling Enables Propagation of Synchronous Spiking Activity in Purely Random Networks

Overview of attention for article published in PLoS Computational Biology, April 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
75 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Non-Additive Coupling Enables Propagation of Synchronous Spiking Activity in Purely Random Networks
Published in
PLoS Computational Biology, April 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002384
Pubmed ID
Authors

Raoul-Martin Memmesheimer, Marc Timme

Abstract

Despite the current debate about the computational role of experimentally observed precise spike patterns it is still theoretically unclear under which conditions and how they may emerge in neural circuits. Here, we study spiking neural networks with non-additive dendritic interactions that were recently uncovered in single-neuron experiments. We show that supra-additive dendritic interactions enable the persistent propagation of synchronous activity already in purely random networks without superimposed structures and explain the mechanism underlying it. This study adds a novel perspective on the dynamics of networks with nonlinear interactions in general and presents a new viable mechanism for the occurrence of patterns of precisely timed spikes in recurrent networks.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 3%
United States 2 3%
Germany 2 3%
Canada 1 1%
Unknown 68 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 26 35%
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 31%
Professor 5 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 7%
Student > Master 4 5%
Other 8 11%
Unknown 4 5%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 20 27%
Physics and Astronomy 11 15%
Computer Science 11 15%
Neuroscience 10 13%
Mathematics 6 8%
Other 9 12%
Unknown 8 11%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 04 November 2021.
All research outputs
#15,455,365
of 25,806,080 outputs
Outputs from PLoS Computational Biology
#6,595
of 9,043 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#101,609
of 175,060 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS Computational Biology
#65
of 103 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,806,080 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,043 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.4. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 175,060 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 103 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.