pith. sign in

arxiv: 2209.06865 · v9 · submitted 2022-09-14 · 🧬 q-bio.NC · cond-mat.dis-nn· cs.AI· cs.NE· q-bio.MN

Sketch of a novel approach to a neural model

Gabriele Scheler This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-24 11:26 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🧬 q-bio.NC cond-mat.dis-nncs.AIcs.NEq-bio.MN
keywords neuroplasticityneuron-centric modelsynapse-centric modelintracellular pathwaysmembrane plasticityself-programming neuronsignal selectionneural modeling
0
0 comments X

The pith

Traditional synapse-centric models of neuroplasticity should give way to neuron-centric models where each cell selects signals for internal storage.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper claims that traditional models centered on independent synaptic weight changes based on transmission history fail to capture the full complexity of neuroplasticity. It proposes a shift to a neuron-centric model in which each neuron selects signals through intracellular pathways to express plasticity at the membrane. This setup gives each neuron its own internal memory, separating transmission from storage so that not every input event leaves a trace. A sympathetic reader would care because the approach treats the neuron as an active self-programming device that processes signals according to its inherent cellular structure. The result points toward memory systems with built-in filtering rather than automatic coupling of every transmission to a weight change.

Core claim

We present an account of neuroplasticity with respect to cell-internal processing pathways in relation to membrane and synaptic plasticity. We think traditional synapse-centric, weight-based models of memorization are not sufficient or adequate to capture the complexity of neuroplasticity. In contrast, we propose a paradigm switch from a synapse-centric model (each synapse learns independently, based on its history of use) to a neuron-centric model (each neuron uses signal selection for intracellular pathways to express plasticity at the membrane). A neural model consists of expression of parameters at the membrane, internal parameters in the sub-membrane zone and the cytoplasm with its蛋白质信号

What carries the argument

Neuron-centric model using signal selection for intracellular pathways to express plasticity at the membrane, with the neuron acting as a self-programming device that maintains separate internal memory.

If this is right

  • Neural transmission and information storage become separate processes rather than automatically linked by coupling strength.
  • Each neuron maintains its own internal memory through cytoplasmic and nuclear parameters.
  • Filtering occurs so that not every transmission event produces a storage trace.
  • The neuron functions as a self-programming device rather than one passively shaped by inputs.
  • Memory systems can process external signals according to the cell's inherent structure.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Simulations built on this view would need to track per-neuron internal states in addition to connection weights.
  • The model suggests specific roles for protein signaling networks in deciding which inputs affect membrane parameters.
  • It opens questions about how genetic and epigenetic information in the nucleus interacts with ongoing signal selection.
  • Experimental focus could shift to identifying molecular filters that determine which synaptic events trigger intracellular changes.

Load-bearing premise

The experimental evidence on neuroplasticity is not well captured by traditional synapse-centric models where each synapse adapts independently based on its history of use.

What would settle it

An observation that all changes in synaptic strength can be fully explained by the history of transmission events at that individual synapse without any intracellular selection mechanism would undermine the need for the neuron-centric approach.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2209.06865 by Gabriele Scheler.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: A shows an outline of the classical synaptic plasticity model. AMPA receptor protein (A) and NMDA (N) in postsynaptic position receive signals from a paired, presynaptic neuron. Calcium influx will activate cAMKII and maybe other proteins, activating ERK and then transcription factors (TF) in the cytoplasm, which enter into the nucleus, where new AMPA receptor protein is produced and transported back to th… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Regulation and plasticity of external parameters. Ion channels and receptors at the spine or the membrane [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: A, B show the variability of ion channel density and the selective modulation of a neuron’s activation function. 3 different ion channels are analyzed, cf. [89] for details. C shows a model neuron with NM modulated re-design of its dendritic function. Red dots show putative spine inhibition (in red-circled areas), blue lines show the decreased dendritic transmission, marked by yellow arrows. 5 [PITH_FULL_… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Control Structures in Vertical Computation. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Timing in Vertical Computation. A: Temporal re-sorting shows how buffers can re-order the timing of signals for activating transcription factors (TFs). Buffer C reacts first because it is saturated. B: Changing the concentration of proteins in a biochemical reaction network (by 100%, details in [95]). Speed changes are shown in red (faster) and blue (slower) hues. (B1) Increasing a target protein (DARPP-34… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Building blocks for self-programming of neurons. Outside signals (Data) are processed by external parameters [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The neuron - drawn as a prototypical cell - acts as a processor which receives fast signals and responds with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: A. The Neural Turing Machine (NTM) [35] is a combination of two recurrent neural networks, one for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_8.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We present an account of neuroplasticity with respect to cell-internal processing pathways in relation to membrane and synaptic plasticity. We think traditional synapse-centric, weight-based models of memorization are not sufficient or adequate to capture the complexity of neuroplasticity. In these accounts, the model is a network of neurons connected by adaptive transmission links. The adaptation of the transmission links relies on weight changes according to use of the transmission link (short-term and long-term potentiation/depression). In contrast, we propose a paradigm switch from a synapse-centric model (each synapse learns independently, based on its history of use) to a neuron-centric model (each neuron uses signal selection for intracellular pathways to express plasticity at the membrane). A neural model consists of (a) expression of parameters at the membrane, in particular dendritic synapses or spines, and axonal boutons (b) internal parameters in the sub-membrane zone and the cytoplasm with its protein signaling network and (c) core parameters in the nucleus for genetic and epigenetic information. In a neuron-centric model, each node (=neuron) in the network has its own internal memory. Neural transmission and information storage are separated, not automatically combined by coupling strength. There is filtering and selection of signals for storage. Not every transmission event leaves a trace. This represents an important conceptual advance over synaptic weight models. We present the neuron as a self-programming device, rather than as passively determined by ongoing input. We believe a new approach to neural modeling is necessary, because the experimental evidence is not well captured by traditional synapse-centric models. Ultimately, we are interested in the possibilities of a flexible memory system that processes external signals according to its inherent structure.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript sketches a conceptual paradigm shift in modeling neuroplasticity, arguing that traditional synapse-centric models (where synapses adapt independently via weight changes based on use history, such as LTP/LTD) are inadequate; it proposes instead a neuron-centric model in which each neuron maintains internal memory through signal selection in intracellular pathways, separating transmission from storage, with parameters expressed at the membrane, sub-membrane zone, and nucleus.

Significance. If the inadequacy of synapse-centric models were demonstrated and the neuron-centric alternative formalized, the proposal could stimulate rethinking of how intracellular signaling contributes to plasticity beyond synaptic weights, potentially informing models of flexible memory. However, as presented, the work offers no derivations, data, or comparisons, limiting its immediate contribution to a qualitative suggestion.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract / main text] Abstract and main text: The central motivation asserts that 'the experimental evidence is not well captured by traditional synapse-centric models' and that a new approach is necessary, but supplies no citations, specific counterexamples (e.g., particular dendritic integration or spine dynamics results), or phenomena where weight-based adaptation necessarily fails; this assertion is load-bearing for the paradigm-switch claim yet remains unsubstantiated.
  2. [Main text] Main text (neuron-centric model description): The alternative is outlined qualitatively (internal memory, signal selection, separation of transmission and storage) without a formal mapping to existing models, equations, algorithms, or testable predictions that would allow direct comparison or falsification, leaving the proposal as an assertion rather than a demonstrably superior framework.
minor comments (1)
  1. The manuscript would benefit from explicit section headings and a clearer delineation between the critique of existing models and the proposed alternative to improve readability.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the detailed and constructive report. We respond to each major comment below, indicating the revisions we will make to address the concerns while preserving the conceptual nature of the manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract / main text] Abstract and main text: The central motivation asserts that 'the experimental evidence is not well captured by traditional synapse-centric models' and that a new approach is necessary, but supplies no citations, specific counterexamples (e.g., particular dendritic integration or spine dynamics results), or phenomena where weight-based adaptation necessarily fails; this assertion is load-bearing for the paradigm-switch claim yet remains unsubstantiated.

    Authors: We accept this point and will strengthen the motivation in the revised manuscript by adding relevant citations and brief descriptions of specific experimental phenomena. For example, we will reference studies on dendritic spikes and local protein synthesis that illustrate limitations of purely synaptic weight-based accounts. This will provide concrete grounding for the paradigm shift claim. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Main text] Main text (neuron-centric model description): The alternative is outlined qualitatively (internal memory, signal selection, separation of transmission and storage) without a formal mapping to existing models, equations, algorithms, or testable predictions that would allow direct comparison or falsification, leaving the proposal as an assertion rather than a demonstrably superior framework.

    Authors: The manuscript is explicitly presented as a sketch, so the qualitative outline is by design to introduce the core ideas. We do not assert superiority but rather propose an alternative perspective. To improve the manuscript, we will add a new subsection that sketches possible mappings to existing frameworks (e.g., relating signal selection to known intracellular signaling pathways) and suggests directions for future formalization and testable predictions. This keeps the response proportional to the scope of a conceptual paper. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: conceptual proposal without derivations or self-referential reductions

full rationale

The paper is a qualitative sketch proposing a neuron-centric model of neuroplasticity versus traditional synapse-centric weight-based models. It contains no equations, no fitted parameters, no derivations, and no citations (self or otherwise) that could form a load-bearing chain. The central motivation—that experimental evidence is not well captured by traditional models—is asserted without reduction to prior results by definition or construction. The proposal introduces distinctions (e.g., separation of transmission and storage, internal memory per neuron) as conceptual advances but does not derive predictions or uniqueness claims that loop back to its own inputs. This is a self-contained conceptual argument with no mathematical or definitional circularity.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 1 invented entities

The proposal rests on the domain assumption that traditional models fail to capture experimental evidence on neuroplasticity and introduces the neuron-centric framework as a new organizing concept without independent evidence or falsifiable predictions in the abstract.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Traditional synapse-centric models are not sufficient or adequate to capture the complexity of neuroplasticity
    Directly stated in the abstract as motivation for the paradigm switch.
invented entities (1)
  • neuron-centric model with internal memory and signal selection no independent evidence
    purpose: To provide a more adequate account of neuroplasticity by separating transmission from storage
    Introduced as the core alternative framework without specific falsifiable predictions or external evidence provided.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5841 in / 1346 out tokens · 41320 ms · 2026-05-24T11:26:05.139546+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

111 extracted references · 111 canonical work pages · 5 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Ketamine and Rapid-Acting Antidepressants: A Window into a New Neurobiology for Mood Disorder Therapeutics

    C. G. Abdallah et al. “Ketamine and Rapid-Acting Antidepressants: A Window into a New Neurobiology for Mood Disorder Therapeutics”. In: Annual Review of Medicine 66 (1 Jan. 2015), pp. 509–523. DOI: 10.1146/ annurev-med-053013-062946

    work page 2015

  2. [2]

    Compensatory variability in network parameters enhances memory performance in the Drosophila mushroom body

    N. Y . Abdelrahman, E. Vasilaki, and A. C. Lin. “Compensatory variability in network parameters enhances memory performance in the Drosophila mushroom body”. In: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 118 (49 Dec. 2021). DOI: 10.1073/PNAS.2102158118/-/DCSUPPLEMENTAL

    work page doi:10.1073/pnas.2102158118/-/dcsupplemental 2021

  3. [3]

    Is plasticity of synapses the mechanism of long-term memory storage?

    W. C. Abraham, O. D. Jones, and D. L. Glanzman. “Is plasticity of synapses the mechanism of long-term memory storage?” In: npj Science of Learning 4 (1 Dec. 2019), p. 9. DOI: 10.1038/s41539-019-0048-y

    work page doi:10.1038/s41539-019-0048-y 2019

  4. [4]

    Possible role of intramembrane receptor-receptor interactions in memory and learning via formation of long-lived heteromeric complexes: focus on motor learning in the basal ganglia

    L. F. Agnati et al. “Possible role of intramembrane receptor-receptor interactions in memory and learning via formation of long-lived heteromeric complexes: focus on motor learning in the basal ganglia”. In: Journal of Neural Transmission, Supplement (65 Jan. 2003), pp. 1–28. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-7091-0643-3_1

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-7091-0643-3_1 2003

  5. [5]

    Intrinsic excitability mechanisms of neuronal ensemble formation

    T. Alejandre-García et al. “Intrinsic excitability mechanisms of neuronal ensemble formation”. In: eLife 11 (May 2022). DOI: 10.7554/eLife.77470

    work page doi:10.7554/elife.77470 2022

  6. [6]

    Plasma membrane insertion of the AMPA receptor GluA2 subunit is regulated by NSF binding and Q/R editing of the ion pore

    Y . Araki, D.-T. Lin, and R. L. Huganir. “Plasma membrane insertion of the AMPA receptor GluA2 subunit is regulated by NSF binding and Q/R editing of the ion pore.” In: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 107 (24 June 2010), pp. 11080–5. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1006584107

    work page doi:10.1073/pnas.1006584107 2010

  7. [7]

    Memory: Axioms and Facts

    Y . I. Arshavsky. “Memory: Axioms and Facts”. In: Neuroscience and Behavioral Physiology 51 (8 Nov. 2021), pp. 1111–1123. DOI: 10.1007/S11055-021-01171-6

    work page doi:10.1007/s11055-021-01171-6 2021

  8. [8]

    Memory: Synaptic or Cellular, That Is the Question

    Y . I. Arshavsky. “Memory: Synaptic or Cellular, That Is the Question.” In:The Neuroscientist (June 2022). DOI: 10.1177/10738584221086488

    work page doi:10.1177/10738584221086488 2022

  9. [9]

    Defining a modular signalling network from the fly interactome

    A. Baudot et al. “Defining a modular signalling network from the fly interactome.” In: BMC systems biology 2 (Jan. 2008), p. 45. DOI: 10.1186/1752-0509-2-45

    work page doi:10.1186/1752-0509-2-45 2008

  10. [10]

    Multiple cellular cascades participate in long-term potentiation and in hippocampus-dependent learning

    M. Baudry et al. “Multiple cellular cascades participate in long-term potentiation and in hippocampus-dependent learning.” In: Brain Research 1621 (Sept. 2015), pp. 73–81. DOI: 10.1016/j.brainres.2014.11.033

    work page doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2014.11.033 2015

  11. [11]

    von Bertalanffy.General System Theory: Foundations, Development, Applications

    L. von Bertalanffy.General System Theory: Foundations, Development, Applications. Revised. George Braziller, Inc., Mar. 1969

    work page 1969

  12. [12]

    Emergent Properties of Networks of Biological Signaling Pathways

    U. S. Bhalla and R. Iyengar. “Emergent Properties of Networks of Biological Signaling Pathways”. In: Science 283 (5400 Jan. 1999), pp. 381–387. DOI: 10.1126/science.283.5400.381

    work page doi:10.1126/science.283.5400.381 1999

  13. [13]

    Discovering adaptation-capable biological network structures using control-theoretic approaches

    P. Bhattacharya, K. Raman, and A. K. Tangirala. “Discovering adaptation-capable biological network structures using control-theoretic approaches”. In: PLOS Computational Biology 18 (1 Jan. 2022). DOI: 10 . 1371 / journal.pcbi.1009769

    work page 2022

  14. [14]

    Nonlinear regulation of unitary synaptic signals by CaV(2.3) voltage- sensitive calcium channels located in dendritic spines

    B. L. Bloodgood and B. L. Sabatini. “Nonlinear regulation of unitary synaptic signals by CaV(2.3) voltage- sensitive calcium channels located in dendritic spines”. In: Neuron 53.2 (2007), pp. 249–60

    work page 2007

  15. [15]

    Myelin: A gatekeeper of activity-dependent circuit plasticity?

    G. Bonetto, D. Belin, and R. T. Káradóttir. “Myelin: A gatekeeper of activity-dependent circuit plasticity?” In: Science (New York, N.Y.) (Oct. 2021). DOI: 10.1126/SCIENCE.ABA6905/ASSET/F35BDC5A-A20B-45C6- AC4E-BDCB00D4B49A/ASSETS/IMAGES/LARGE/SCIENCE.ABA6905-FA.JPG

    work page doi:10.1126/science.aba6905/asset/f35bdc5a-a20b-45c6- 2021

  16. [16]

    A brain atlas of synapse protein lifetime across the mouse lifespan

    E. Bulovaite et al. “A brain atlas of synapse protein lifetime across the mouse lifespan”. In: Neuron S0896- 6273.22 (Sept. 2022). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2022.09.009

    work page doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2022.09.009 2022

  17. [17]

    Electrophysiological diversity of layer 5 pyramidal cells in the prefrontal cortex of the rhesus monkey: in vitro slice studies

    Y . M. Chang and J. I. Luebke. “Electrophysiological diversity of layer 5 pyramidal cells in the prefrontal cortex of the rhesus monkey: in vitro slice studies”. In: Journal of Neurophysiology 98 (5 Nov. 2007), pp. 2622–2632. DOI: 10.1152/JN.00585.2007

    work page doi:10.1152/jn.00585.2007 2007

  18. [18]

    Requirements for LTP induction by pairing in hippocampal CA1 pyramidal cells

    H. X. Chen, N. Otmakhov, and J. Lisman. “Requirements for LTP induction by pairing in hippocampal CA1 pyramidal cells”. In: Journal of Neurophysiology 82 (2 1999), pp. 526–532. DOI: 10.1152/JN.1999.82.2. 526/ASSET/IMAGES/LARGE/9K0890409005.JPEG

    work page doi:10.1152/jn.1999.82.2 1999

  19. [19]

    Innovation and robustness in complex regulatory gene networks

    S Ciliberti, O. C. Martin, and A Wagner. “Innovation and robustness in complex regulatory gene networks.” In: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 104 (34 Aug. 2007), pp. 13591–6. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0705396104

    work page doi:10.1073/pnas.0705396104 2007

  20. [20]

    Synaptic Plasticity: Multiple Forms, Functions, and Mechanisms

    A. Citri and R. C. Malenka. “Synaptic Plasticity: Multiple Forms, Functions, and Mechanisms”. In: Neuropsy- chopharmacology 33 (1 Jan. 2008), pp. 18–41. DOI: 10.1038/sj.npp.1301559

    work page doi:10.1038/sj.npp.1301559 2008

  21. [21]

    Integrating metabolic, transcriptional regulatory and signal transduction models in Escherichia coli

    M. W. Covert et al. “Integrating metabolic, transcriptional regulatory and signal transduction models in Escherichia coli.” In: Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) 24 (18 Sept. 2008), pp. 2044–50. DOI: 10.1093/ bioinformatics/btn352. 14

    work page 2008

  22. [22]

    Mathematical and computational techniques to deduce complex biochemical reaction mechanisms

    E. J. Crampin, S Schnell, and P. E. McSharry. “Mathematical and computational techniques to deduce complex biochemical reaction mechanisms.” In: Progress in Biophysics and Molecular Biology 86 (1 Sept. 2004), pp. 77–112. DOI: 10.1016/j.pbiomolbio.2004.04.002

    work page doi:10.1016/j.pbiomolbio.2004.04.002 2004

  23. [23]

    Plasticity of neuronal excitability in vivo

    D. Debanne. “Plasticity of neuronal excitability in vivo.” In: The Journal of physiology 587 (Pt 13 July 2009), pp. 3057–8. DOI: 10.1113/jphysiol.2009.175448

    work page doi:10.1113/jphysiol.2009.175448 2009

  24. [24]

    Plasticity of intrinsic neuronal excitability

    D. Debanne, Y . Inglebert, and M. Russier. “Plasticity of intrinsic neuronal excitability”. In: Current Opinion in Neurobiology 54 (Feb. 2019), pp. 73–82. DOI: 10.1016/j.conb.2018.09.001

    work page doi:10.1016/j.conb.2018.09.001 2019

  25. [25]

    Tuning of fast-spiking interneuron properties by an activity-dependent transcriptional switch

    N. Dehorter et al. “Tuning of fast-spiking interneuron properties by an activity-dependent transcriptional switch.” In: Science (New York, N.Y.)349 (6253 Sept. 2015), pp. 1216–20. DOI: 10.1126/science.aab3415

    work page doi:10.1126/science.aab3415 2015

  26. [26]

    On the steady states of weakly reversible chemical reaction networks

    J. Deng et al. “On the Steady States of weakly Reversible Chemical Reaction Networks”. In: arXiv (2011), pp. 1–20. DOI: 10.48550/ARXIV.1111.2386

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.1111.2386 2011

  27. [27]

    Excitation-Transcription Coupling: Signaling by Ion Channels to the Nucleus

    R. Dolmetsch. “Excitation-Transcription Coupling: Signaling by Ion Channels to the Nucleus”. In: Science’s STKE 2003 (166 Jan. 2003). DOI: 10.1126/stke.2003.166.pe4

    work page doi:10.1126/stke.2003.166.pe4 2003

  28. [28]

    Differential regulation of local mRNA dynamics and translation following long-term potentiation and depression

    P. G. Donlin-Asp et al. “Differential regulation of local mRNA dynamics and translation following long-term potentiation and depression”. In: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 118 (13 Mar. 2021). DOI: 10.1073/PNAS.2017578118/-/DCSUPPLEMENTAL

    work page doi:10.1073/pnas.2017578118/-/dcsupplemental 2021

  29. [29]

    Ion channel degeneracy enables robust and tunable neuronal firing rates

    G. Drion et al. “Ion channel degeneracy enables robust and tunable neuronal firing rates”. In: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 112 (38 Sept. 2015), E5361–E5370. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1516400112

    work page doi:10.1073/pnas.1516400112 2015

  30. [30]

    Formation and Maintenance of Robust Long-Term Information Storage in the Presence of Synaptic Turnover

    M. Fauth, F. Wörgötter, and C. Tetzlaff. “Formation and Maintenance of Robust Long-Term Information Storage in the Presence of Synaptic Turnover”. In: PLOS Computational Biology 11 (12 2015). DOI: 10.1371/ JOURNAL.PCBI.1004684

    work page 2015

  31. [31]

    Deciphering Ca2+-controlled biochemical computation governing neural circuit dynamics via multiplex imaging

    H. Fujii and H. Bito. “Deciphering Ca2+-controlled biochemical computation governing neural circuit dynamics via multiplex imaging”. In: Neuroscience Research (June 2022). DOI: 10.1016/J.NEURES.2022.04.004

    work page doi:10.1016/j.neures.2022.04.004 2022

  32. [32]

    The Neuroscience of Learning: Beyond the Hebbian Synapse

    C. Gallistel and L. D. Matzel. “The Neuroscience of Learning: Beyond the Hebbian Synapse”. In: Annual Review of Psychology 64 (1 Jan. 2013), pp. 169–200. DOI: 10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143807

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143807 2013

  33. [33]

    Muscarinic modulation of SK2-type K+ channels promotes intrinsic plasticity in L2/3 pyramidal neurons of the mouse primary somatosensory cortex

    D. F. Gill and C. Hansel. “Muscarinic modulation of SK2-type K+ channels promotes intrinsic plasticity in L2/3 pyramidal neurons of the mouse primary somatosensory cortex”. In: eNeuro 7 (2 Mar. 2020), pp. 1–10. DOI: 10.1523/ENEURO.0453-19.2020

    work page doi:10.1523/eneuro.0453-19.2020 2020

  34. [34]

    Ionic Current Variability and Functional Stability in the Nervous System

    J. Golowasch. “Ionic Current Variability and Functional Stability in the Nervous System”. In: BioScience 64 (7 July 2014), pp. 570–580. DOI: 10.1093/biosci/biu070

    work page doi:10.1093/biosci/biu070 2014

  35. [35]

    Neural Turing Machines

    A. Graves, G. Wayne, and I. Danihelka.Neural Turing Machines. arXiv. Oct. 2014. DOI: 10.48550/ARXIV. 1410.5401

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv 2014

  36. [36]

    A Path Toward Explainable AI and Autonomous Adaptive Intelligence: Deep Learning, Adaptive Resonance, and Models of Perception, Emotion, and Action

    S. Grossberg. “A Path Toward Explainable AI and Autonomous Adaptive Intelligence: Deep Learning, Adaptive Resonance, and Models of Perception, Emotion, and Action”. In: Frontiers in Neurorobotics14 (June 2020). DOI: 10.3389/FNBOT.2020.00036

    work page doi:10.3389/fnbot.2020.00036 2020

  37. [37]

    Synaptic integration in dendritic trees

    A. T. Gulledge, B. M. Kampa, and G. J. Stuart. “Synaptic integration in dendritic trees”. In: Journal of Neurobiology 64 (1 2005), pp. 75–90. DOI: 10.1002/NEU.20144

    work page doi:10.1002/neu.20144 2005

  38. [38]

    An Introduction to Variable and Feature Selection

    I. Guyon and A. Elisseeff. “An Introduction to Variable and Feature Selection”. In:Journal of Machine Learning Research 3 (2003), pp. 1157–1182. DOI: 10.5555/944919.944968

    work page doi:10.5555/944919.944968 2003

  39. [39]

    Environment-specific expression of the immediate-early gene Arc in hippocampal neuronal ensembles

    J. F. Guzowski et al. “Environment-specific expression of the immediate-early gene Arc in hippocampal neuronal ensembles.” In: Nature Neuroscience 2 (12 Dec. 1999), pp. 1120–4. DOI: 10.1038/16046

    work page doi:10.1038/16046 1999

  40. [40]

    Experience-Dependent Gene Expression in the Rat Hippocampus after Spatial Learning: A Comparison of the Immediate-Early Genes Arc , c- fos , and zif268

    J. F. Guzowski et al. “Experience-Dependent Gene Expression in the Rat Hippocampus after Spatial Learning: A Comparison of the Immediate-Early Genes Arc , c- fos , and zif268”. In: The Journal of Neuroscience 21 (14 July 2001), pp. 5089–5098. DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.21-14-05089.2001

    work page doi:10.1523/jneurosci.21-14-05089.2001 2001

  41. [41]

    Small-conductance Ca2+-activated K+ channel type 2 (SK2) modulates hippocampal learning, memory, and synaptic plasticity

    R. S. Hammond et al. “Small-conductance Ca2+-activated K+ channel type 2 (SK2) modulates hippocampal learning, memory, and synaptic plasticity.” In: The Journal of Neuroscience 26 (6 Feb. 2006), pp. 1844–53. DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4106-05.2006

    work page doi:10.1523/jneurosci.4106-05.2006 2006

  42. [42]

    The essence of the engram: Cellular or synaptic?

    D. H. Han et al. “The essence of the engram: Cellular or synaptic?” In: Seminars in Cell & Developmental Biology 125 (2022), pp. 122–135. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.semcdb.2021.05.033

    work page doi:10.1016/j.semcdb.2021.05.033 2022

  43. [43]

    Ultrasensitive responses and specificity in cell signaling

    S. Haney, L. Bardwell, and Q. Nie. “Ultrasensitive responses and specificity in cell signaling.” In: BMC systems biology 4 (Jan. 2010), p. 119. DOI: 10.1186/1752-0509-4-119

    work page doi:10.1186/1752-0509-4-119 2010

  44. [44]

    A fast learning algorithm for deep belief nets

    G. E. Hinton, S. Osindero, and Y . W. Teh. “A fast learning algorithm for deep belief nets”. In: Neural Computation 18 (7 July 2006), pp. 1527–1554. DOI: 10.1162/NECO.2006.18.7.1527

    work page doi:10.1162/neco.2006.18.7.1527 2006

  45. [45]

    1997, Neural Computation, 9, 1735, 10.1162/neco.1997.9.8.1735

    S. Hochreiter and J. Schmidhuber. “Long Short-Term Memory”. In: Neural Comput. 9.8 (1997), 1735–1780. DOI: 10.1162/neco.1997.9.8.1735. 15

    work page doi:10.1162/neco.1997.9.8.1735 1997

  46. [46]

    A Simple Language Model for Task-Oriented Dialogue

    E. Hosseini-Asl et al. “A Simple Language Model for Task-Oriented Dialogue”. In: CoRR abs/2005.00796 (2020). DOI: 10.48550/ARXIV.2005.00796

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2005.00796 2005

  47. [47]

    Conductance Ratios and Cellular Identity

    A. E. Hudson and A. A. Prinz. “Conductance Ratios and Cellular Identity”. In: PLOS Computational Biology 6 (7 July 2010). DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000838

    work page doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000838 2010

  48. [48]

    Dendritic calcium spikes induce bi-directional synaptic plasticity in the lateral amygdala

    Y . Humeau and A. Lüthi. “Dendritic calcium spikes induce bi-directional synaptic plasticity in the lateral amygdala”. In: Neuropharmacology 52 (1 Jan. 2007), pp. 234–243. DOI: 10.1016/J.NEUROPHARM.2006.07. 010

    work page doi:10.1016/j.neuropharm.2006.07 2007

  49. [49]

    Protein kinases and phosphatases: the yin and yang of protein phosphorylation and signaling

    T Hunter. “Protein kinases and phosphatases: the yin and yang of protein phosphorylation and signaling.” In: Cell 80 (2 Jan. 1995), pp. 225–36. DOI: 10.1016/0092-8674(95)90405-0

    work page doi:10.1016/0092-8674(95)90405-0 1995

  50. [50]

    K. Jarvis. Computationally Modeling Dynamic Biological Systems. University of Maine, 2021

    work page 2021

  51. [51]

    Ryanodine Receptor Activation Induces Long-Term Plasticity of Spine Calcium Dynamics

    F. W. Johenning et al. “Ryanodine Receptor Activation Induces Long-Term Plasticity of Spine Calcium Dynamics”. In: PLOS Biology 13 (6 June 2015). DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1002181

    work page doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1002181 2015

  52. [52]

    Memory engrams: Recalling the past and imagining the future

    S. A. Josselyn and S. Tonegawa. “Memory engrams: Recalling the past and imagining the future”. In: Science (New York, N.Y.)367 (6473 Jan. 2020). DOI: 10.1126/SCIENCE.AAW4325

    work page doi:10.1126/science.aaw4325 2020

  53. [53]

    The Mechanisms Behind Rapid Antidepressant Effects of Ketamine: A Systematic Review With a Focus on Molecular Neuroplasticity

    M. J. Y . Kang, E. Hawken, and G. H. Vazquez. “The Mechanisms Behind Rapid Antidepressant Effects of Ketamine: A Systematic Review With a Focus on Molecular Neuroplasticity”. In: Frontiers in Psychiatry13 (Apr. 2022). DOI: 10.3389/FPSYT.2022.860882

    work page doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2022.860882 2022

  54. [54]

    A multi-layer ADaptive FUnction neural network (MADFUNN) for analytical function recognition

    M. Kang and D. Palmer-Brown. “A multi-layer ADaptive FUnction neural network (MADFUNN) for analytical function recognition”. In: IEEE International Conference on Neural Networks - Conference Proceedings(2006), pp. 1784–1789. DOI: 10.1109/IJCNN.2006.246895

    work page doi:10.1109/ijcnn.2006.246895 2006

  55. [55]

    A Dynamic Connectome Supports the Emergence of Stable Computational Function of Neural Circuits through Reward-Based Learning

    D. Kappel et al. “A Dynamic Connectome Supports the Emergence of Stable Computational Function of Neural Circuits through Reward-Based Learning”. In: eNeuro 5.2 (2018). DOI: 10.1523/ENEURO.0301-17.2018

    work page doi:10.1523/eneuro.0301-17.2018 2018

  56. [56]

    Spine dynamics in the brain, mental disorders and artificial neural networks

    H. Kasai et al. “Spine dynamics in the brain, mental disorders and artificial neural networks”. In:Nature reviews. Neuroscience 22 (7 July 2021), pp. 407–422. DOI: 10.1038/S41583-021-00467-3

    work page doi:10.1038/s41583-021-00467-3 2021

  57. [57]

    Long-term synaptic plasticity in hippocampal interneurons

    D. M. Kullmann and K. P. Lamsa. “Long-term synaptic plasticity in hippocampal interneurons.” In: Nature reviews. Neuroscience 8 (9 Sept. 2007), pp. 687–99. DOI: 10.1038/nrn2207

    work page doi:10.1038/nrn2207 2007

  58. [58]

    Locating the engram: Should we look for plastic synapses or information- storing molecules?

    J. J. Langille and C. R. Gallistel. “Locating the engram: Should we look for plastic synapses or information- storing molecules?” In: Neurobiology of Learning and Memory 169 (June 2019 Mar. 2020), p. 107164. DOI: 10.1016/j.nlm.2020.107164

    work page doi:10.1016/j.nlm.2020.107164 2019

  59. [59]

    Gene networks activated by specific patterns of action potentials in dorsal root ganglia neurons

    P. R. Lee et al. “Gene networks activated by specific patterns of action potentials in dorsal root ganglia neurons”. In: Scientific Reports 7 (1 Mar. 2017), p. 43765. DOI: 10.1038/srep43765

    work page doi:10.1038/srep43765 2017

  60. [60]

    Depolarization-induced long-term depression at hippocampal mossy fiber-CA3 pyramidal neuron synapses

    S. Lei et al. “Depolarization-induced long-term depression at hippocampal mossy fiber-CA3 pyramidal neuron synapses.” In: The Journal of Neuroscience 23 (30 Oct. 2003), pp. 9786–95. DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.23- 30-09786.2003

    work page doi:10.1523/jneurosci.23- 2003

  61. [61]

    Making Synapses Strong: Metaplasticity Prolongs Associativity of Long-Term Memory by Switching Synaptic Tag Mechanisms

    Q. Li et al. “Making Synapses Strong: Metaplasticity Prolongs Associativity of Long-Term Memory by Switching Synaptic Tag Mechanisms”. In: Cerebral Cortex 24 (2 Feb. 2014), pp. 353–363. DOI: 10.1093/ cercor/bhs315

    work page 2014

  62. [62]

    Ketamine exerts its sustained antidepressant effects via cell-type-specific regulation of Kcnq2

    J. P. Lopez et al. “Ketamine exerts its sustained antidepressant effects via cell-type-specific regulation of Kcnq2”. In: Neuron (May 2022). DOI: 10.1016/j.neuron.2022.05.001

    work page doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2022.05.001 2022

  63. [63]

    Spike-dependent intrinsic plasticity increases firing probability in rat striatal neurons in vivo

    S. Mahon et al. “Spike-dependent intrinsic plasticity increases firing probability in rat striatal neurons in vivo.” In: The Journal of Physiology 550 (Pt 3 Aug. 2003), pp. 947–959. DOI: 10.1113/jphysiol.2003.043125

    work page doi:10.1113/jphysiol.2003.043125 2003

  64. [64]

    LTP and LTD: An embarrassment of riches

    R. C. Malenka and M. F. Bear. “LTP and LTD: An embarrassment of riches”. In: Neuron 44 (1 Sept. 2004), pp. 5–21. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuron.2004.09.012

    work page doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2004.09.012 2004

  65. [65]

    The brain in motion: How ensemble fluidity drives memory-updating and flexibility

    W. Mau, M. E. Hasselmo, and D. J. Cai. “The brain in motion: How ensemble fluidity drives memory-updating and flexibility”. In: eLife 9 (Dec. 2020), pp. 1–24. DOI: 10.7554/eLife.63550

    work page doi:10.7554/elife.63550 2020

  66. [66]

    Ultrastructural Correlates of Presynaptic Functional Heterogeneity in Hippocampal Synapses

    L. Maus et al. “Ultrastructural Correlates of Presynaptic Functional Heterogeneity in Hippocampal Synapses”. In: Cell Reports 30 (11 Mar. 2020), 3632–3643.E8. DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2020.02.083

    work page doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2020.02.083 2020

  67. [67]

    The plasticitome of cortical interneurons

    A. McFarlan et al. “The plasticitome of cortical interneurons”. In: Nature Reviews Neuroscience (Dec. 2022). DOI: 10.1038/s41583-022-00663-9

    work page doi:10.1038/s41583-022-00663-9 2022

  68. [68]

    Ca 2+ -Operated Transcriptional Networks: Molecular Mechanisms and In Vivo Models

    B. Mellström et al. “Ca 2+ -Operated Transcriptional Networks: Molecular Mechanisms and In Vivo Models”. In: Physiological Reviews 88 (2 Apr. 2008), pp. 421–449. DOI: 10.1152/physrev.00041.2005

    work page doi:10.1152/physrev.00041.2005 2008

  69. [69]

    Role of immediate-early genes in synaptic plasticity and neuronal ensembles underlying the memory trace

    K. Minatohara, M. Akiyoshi, and H. Okuno. “Role of immediate-early genes in synaptic plasticity and neuronal ensembles underlying the memory trace”. In: Frontiers in Molelcular Neuroscience8 (JAN2016 Jan. 2016). DOI: 10.3389/fnmol.2015.00078. 16

    work page doi:10.3389/fnmol.2015.00078 2016

  70. [70]

    Chari and L

    M. Miski et al. “Diversity of synaptic protein complexes as a function of the abundance of their constituent proteins: A modeling approach”. In: PLOS Computational Biology 18 (1 Jan. 2022). DOI: 10.1371/JOURNAL. PCBI.1009758

    work page doi:10.1371/journal 2022

  71. [71]

    Intrinsic volatility of synaptic connections — a challenge to the synaptic trace theory of memory

    G. Mongillo, S. Rumpel, and Y . Loewenstein. “Intrinsic volatility of synaptic connections — a challenge to the synaptic trace theory of memory”. In: Current Opinion in Neurobiology 46 (Oct. 2017), pp. 7–13. DOI: 10.1016/j.conb.2017.06.006

    work page doi:10.1016/j.conb.2017.06.006 2017

  72. [72]

    Regulation of GABAARs by Phosphorylation

    Y . Nakamura et al. “Regulation of GABAARs by Phosphorylation”. In: Advances in Pharmacology 72 (2015), pp. 97–146. DOI: 10.1016/BS.APHA.2014.11.008

    work page doi:10.1016/bs.apha.2014.11.008 2015

  73. [73]

    Visual deprivation suppresses L5 pyramidal neuron excitability by preventing the induction of intrinsic plasticity

    K. Nataraj et al. “Visual deprivation suppresses L5 pyramidal neuron excitability by preventing the induction of intrinsic plasticity.” In: Neuron 68 (4 Nov. 2010), pp. 750–62. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuron.2010.09.033

    work page doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2010.09.033 2010

  74. [74]

    Structure and function of dendritic spines

    E. A. Nimchinsky, B. L. Sabatini, and K. Svoboda. “Structure and function of dendritic spines”. In: Annual review of physiology 64 (2002), pp. 313–353. DOI: 10.1146/ANNUREV.PHYSIOL.64.081501.160008

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev.physiol.64.081501.160008 2002

  75. [75]

    Calcium stores regulate the polarity and input specificity of synaptic modification

    M Nishiyama et al. “Calcium stores regulate the polarity and input specificity of synaptic modification”. In: Nature 408.6812 (2000), pp. 584–8. DOI: 10.1038/35046067

    work page doi:10.1038/35046067 2000

  76. [76]

    Air traffic control complexity as workload driver

    T. O’Leary et al. “Cell Types, Network Homeostasis, and Pathological Compensation from a Biologically Plausible Ion Channel Expression Model”. In: Neuron 82 (4 May 2014), pp. 809–821. DOI: 10.1016/j. neuron.2014.04.002

    work page doi:10.1016/j 2014

  77. [77]

    Overcoming Catastrophic Forgetting by Neuron-Level Plasticity Control

    I. Paik et al. “Overcoming Catastrophic Forgetting by Neuron-Level Plasticity Control”. In: Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence 34 (04 Apr. 2020), pp. 5339–5346. DOI: 10.1609/aaai.v34i04. 5981

    work page doi:10.1609/aaai.v34i04 2020

  78. [78]

    Park et al

    A. Park et al. “A time-dependent role for the transcription factor CREB in neuronal allocation to an engram underlying a fear memory revealed using a novel in vivo optogenetic tool to modulate CREB function.” In: Neuropsychopharmacology 45 (6 May 2020), pp. 916–924. DOI: 10.1038/s41386-019-0588-0

    work page doi:10.1038/s41386-019-0588-0 2020

  79. [79]

    Anatomy and physiology of the thick-tufted layer 5 pyramidal neuron

    S. Ramaswamy and H. Markram. “Anatomy and physiology of the thick-tufted layer 5 pyramidal neuron”. In: Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience9 (June 2015), pp. 1–29. DOI: 10.3389/fncel.2015.00233

    work page doi:10.3389/fncel.2015.00233 2015

  80. [80]

    Making memories last: the synaptic tagging and capture hypothesis

    R. L. Redondo and R. G. M. Morris. “Making memories last: the synaptic tagging and capture hypothesis”. In: Nature Reviews Neuroscience 12 (1 Jan. 2011), pp. 17–30. DOI: 10.1038/nrn2963

    work page doi:10.1038/nrn2963 2011

Showing first 80 references.