↓ Skip to main content

Free Energy and Dendritic Self-Organization

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience, January 2011
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 (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users

Readers on

mendeley
188 Mendeley
citeulike
3 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
Free Energy and Dendritic Self-Organization
Published in
Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience, January 2011
DOI 10.3389/fnsys.2011.00080
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stefan J. Kiebel, Karl J. Friston

Abstract

In this paper, we pursue recent observations that, through selective dendritic filtering, single neurons respond to specific sequences of presynaptic inputs. We try to provide a principled and mechanistic account of this selectivity by applying a recent free-energy principle to a dendrite that is immersed in its neuropil or environment. We assume that neurons self-organize to minimize a variational free-energy bound on the self-information or surprise of presynaptic inputs that are sampled. We model this as a selective pruning of dendritic spines that are expressed on a dendritic branch. This pruning occurs when postsynaptic gain falls below a threshold. Crucially, postsynaptic gain is itself optimized with respect to free energy. Pruning suppresses free energy as the dendrite selects presynaptic signals that conform to its expectations, specified by a generative model implicit in its intracellular kinetics. Not only does this provide a principled account of how neurons organize and selectively sample the myriad of potential presynaptic inputs they are exposed to, but it also connects the optimization of elemental neuronal (dendritic) processing to generic (surprise or evidence-based) schemes in statistics and machine learning, such as Bayesian model selection and automatic relevance determination.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 188 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 2%
United Kingdom 4 2%
Switzerland 3 2%
Germany 3 2%
Australia 2 1%
Portugal 2 1%
France 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Other 1 <1%
Unknown 166 88%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 50 27%
Researcher 45 24%
Student > Master 19 10%
Professor 12 6%
Student > Bachelor 9 5%
Other 31 16%
Unknown 22 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 40 21%
Neuroscience 31 16%
Psychology 19 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 18 10%
Computer Science 17 9%
Other 33 18%
Unknown 30 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 13 September 2023.
All research outputs
#6,132,372
of 24,988,543 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience
#452
of 1,404 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#43,306
of 192,919 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience
#12
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,988,543 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,404 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 192,919 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 38 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 71% of its contemporaries.