↓ Skip to main content

Variability of Neuronal Responses: Types and Functional Significance in Neuroplasticity and Neural Darwinism

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
13 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
48 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
Variability of Neuronal Responses: Types and Functional Significance in Neuroplasticity and Neural Darwinism
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, November 2016
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2016.00603
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alexander V. Chervyakov, Dmitry O. Sinitsyn, Michael A. Piradov

Abstract

HIGHLIGHTS We suggest classifying variability of neuronal responses as follows: false (associated with a lack of knowledge about the influential factors), "genuine harmful" (noise), "genuine neutral" (synonyms, repeats), and "genuine useful" (the basis of neuroplasticity and learning).The genuine neutral variability is considered in terms of the phenomenon of degeneracy.Of particular importance is the genuine useful variability that is considered as a potential basis for neuroplasticity and learning. This type of variability is considered in terms of the neural Darwinism theory. In many cases, neural signals detected under the same external experimental conditions significantly change from trial to trial. The variability phenomenon, which complicates extraction of reproducible results and is ignored in many studies by averaging, has attracted attention of researchers in recent years. In this paper, we classify possible types of variability based on its functional significance and describe features of each type. We describe the key adaptive significance of variability at the neural network level and the degeneracy phenomenon that may be important for learning processes in connection with the principle of neuronal group selection.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 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 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Unknown 47 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 27%
Student > Master 11 23%
Researcher 8 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Student > Bachelor 3 6%
Other 7 15%
Unknown 3 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 13 27%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 13%
Psychology 5 10%
Engineering 5 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 6%
Other 12 25%
Unknown 4 8%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 31 May 2018.
All research outputs
#5,224,355
of 25,759,158 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#2,154
of 7,761 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#92,827
of 418,555 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#45
of 168 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,759,158 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,761 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 418,555 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 168 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 72% of its contemporaries.