↓ Skip to main content

Impact of neuronal heterogeneity on correlated colored noise-induced synchronization

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
49 Mendeley
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
Impact of neuronal heterogeneity on correlated colored noise-induced synchronization
Published in
Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fncom.2013.00113
Pubmed ID
Authors

Pengcheng Zhou, Shawn D. Burton, Nathaniel N. Urban, G. Bard Ermentrout

Abstract

Synchronization plays an important role in neural signal processing and transmission. Many hypotheses have been proposed to explain the origin of neural synchronization. In recent years, correlated noise-induced synchronization has received support from many theoretical and experimental studies. However, many of these prior studies have assumed that neurons have identical biophysical properties and that their inputs are well modeled by white noise. In this context, we use colored noise to induce synchronization between oscillators with heterogeneity in both phase-response curves and frequencies. In the low noise limit, we derive novel analytical theory showing that the time constant of colored noise influences correlated noise-induced synchronization and that oscillator heterogeneity can limit synchronization. Surprisingly, however, heterogeneous oscillators may synchronize better than homogeneous oscillators given low input correlations. We also find resonance of oscillator synchronization to colored noise inputs when firing frequencies diverge. Collectively, these results prove robust for both relatively high noise regimes and when applied to biophysically realistic spiking neuron models, and further match experimental recordings from acute brain slices.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 4%
United States 2 4%
Unknown 45 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 31%
Researcher 8 16%
Student > Postgraduate 5 10%
Student > Master 4 8%
Professor 3 6%
Other 6 12%
Unknown 8 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 14 29%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 24%
Engineering 4 8%
Computer Science 3 6%
Mathematics 3 6%
Other 7 14%
Unknown 6 12%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 21 August 2013.
All research outputs
#15,276,424
of 22,716,996 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
#868
of 1,336 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#181,538
of 280,757 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
#76
of 131 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,716,996 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,336 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 280,757 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 131 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.