Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 61 references

Hierarchical clusters in neuronal populations with plasticity

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This paper reports that a Hodgkin-Huxley network with symmetric spike-timing-dependent plasticity can self-organize into hierarchical frequency clusters, and that a two-variable phase-and-coupling model captures when those clusters…

desk verdict A plausible, well-illustrated computational study of STDP-driven frequency clusters in Hodgkin-Huxley neurons, with a useful reduced model; the missing simulation parameters make the quantitative comparison hard to verify but not a fatal flaw. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.04103 v2 pith:YHXJONJV submitted 2019-08-12 nlin.AO

Vera Röhr , Rico Berner , Ewandson L. Lameu , Oleksandr V. Popovych , Serhiy Yanchuk This is my paper · ORCID
classification nlin.AO MSC 34C1534D0637N2592C20
keywords spiketiming-dependentplasticityHodgkin-Huxleyneuronsfrequencyclusteringhierarchicalclustersslowoscillationsmeanfieldmodulationadaptivenetworksynchronization
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper reports that a population of Hodgkin-Huxley neurons with symmetric spike-timing-dependent plasticity can self-organize into frequency clusters of different sizes: the largest cluster fires slowest, each smaller cluster fires faster, and connections between clusters are depressed while connections within a cluster are potentiated. The authors' central move is to compress two interacting clusters into a two-dimensional system for their phase difference and mean coupling, with the coupling adapting on a much slower timescale through a plasticity function G(φ). That model explains why clusters of sufficiently different sizes are stable and similar-sized clusters merge, and it predicts the plasticity windows that allow clustering. The wider consequence is that cluster dynamics can amplitude-modulate the population's mean activity at sub-Hertz timescales even though every neuron fires tonically, offering a candidate mechanism for slow fluctuations in LFP, EEG, and BOLD signals.

What carries the argument

The central object is the two-cluster phenomenological model: $\dot\varphi = \omega - \sigma \sin(\varphi+\alpha)$ and $\dot\sigma = \varepsilon G(\varphi)$, where $G(\varphi) = W\big((2\pi-(\varphi \bmod 2\pi))/\bar\omega\big) + W\big((\varphi \bmod 2\pi)/\bar\omega\big)$ sums the two STDP updates per common period $T\approx 2\pi/\bar\omega$, and $W$ is the double-exponential symmetric plasticity window. The small parameter $\varepsilon$ separates the fast phase dynamics from the slow coupling adaptation. The phase portrait is organized by a saddle fixed point $(\varphi^*,\sigma^*)$; the condition $\sigma(\varphi^*) = \sigma^*$ marks the boundary between fusion and stable coexistence, and the paper uses it to map which plasticity windows $W$ produce stable clusters.

What would settle it

Track the projected phase difference $\varphi_{\mathrm{HH}}$ and mean inter-cluster coupling $\sigma_{\mathrm{HH}}$ in the full network near the predicted fusion boundary and check the reduced model's condition $\sigma(\varphi^*) < \sigma^*$ for stable clusters; a surviving cluster with $\sigma(\varphi^*) > \sigma^*$, or a fusing pair with $\sigma(\varphi^*) < \sigma^*$, would refute the mechanism.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper claims that a network of identical Hodgkin-Huxley neurons with symmetric spike-timing-dependent plasticity does not settle into a single fate: depending on initial conditions and plasticity parameters, it can reach full synchrony or a hierarchical cluster state in which each group fires at its own frequency and the largest group fires slowest. The stabilization of these clusters is controlled by the slow adaptation of inter-cluster synaptic weights. When two clusters come into phase, their mutual coupling is potentiated, but if their frequency difference is large enough the in-phase episode is brief and the subsequent out-of-phase interval depresses the inter-cluster weights back toward zero, keeping the clusters apart. The paper reduces this to the two-dimensional system $\dot\varphi = \omega-\sigma\sin(\varphi+\alpha)$, $\dot\sigma = \varepsilon G(\varphi)$ and shows that the same phase portraits—fusion, coexistence of synchrony with stable clusters, and full decoupling—appear in the full network when its cluster phases and mean inter-cluster coupling are projected onto the $(\varphi,\sigma)$ plane. It also shows that the mean synaptic activity of the two-cluster state is modulated on a timescale of seconds, about two orders of magnitude slower than the tens-of-milliseconds firing periods, which the authors connect to slow LFP, EEG, and BOLD oscillations.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing assumption is that during the brief moments when two clusters align, their spiking periods are close enough to a single common value that the plasticity update can be written as a fixed function of their phase difference alone; if the periods diverge during those episodes, the predicted boundary between stable and fusing clusters may not carry over from the reduced model to the full network.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Stable frequency clusters require sufficiently different cluster sizes; similar-sized clusters fuse into global synchrony.
  • The population mean field of a two-cluster state is amplitude-modulated on a timescale set by the cluster frequency difference (about 2.5 seconds in the example), two orders of magnitude slower than the roughly 15-millisecond firing period.
  • There is a coexistence regime in which complete synchrony and stable clusters are both attractors, so initial conditions or perturbations determine which state is reached.
  • For plasticity windows with $c_d \geq c_p$ and $\tau_d \geq \tau_p$, the update function $G(\varphi)$ is non-positive everywhere and the network decouples instead of clustering.
  • Weak random synaptic input preserves clusters, while stronger input destroys the smaller clusters first, meaning cluster stability is size-dependent.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A natural extension is to test the same slow-fast phase-and-coupling reduction in other conductance-based spiking models; the mechanism should survive as long as within-cluster synchrony and weak inter-cluster coupling hold.
  • The hierarchical size distribution implies a discrete set of reachable cluster partitions; mapping which initial conditions lead to which partition would treat the network as a multi-stable encoder of its own history.
  • The model predicts a sharp experimental signature: blocking the potentiation of inter-cluster synapses during in-phase episodes should remove the slow mean-field modulation while leaving tonic firing intact, distinguishing this mechanism from slow-bursting generators.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper reports numerical observations of frequency clustering in a Hodgkin-Huxley network with symmetric spike timing-dependent plasticity (STDP). Depending on initial conditions, the network either fully synchronizes or splits into a few clusters that are synchronized internally at different frequencies and are hierarchical in size; the mean synaptic activity then exhibits slow amplitude modulations on a timescale much longer than individual spiking. The authors propose a two-dimensional phenomenological model for two clusters, with phase difference phi and mean inter-cluster coupling sigma, in which the coupling evolves as sigma_dot = epsilon G(phi), where G is derived from the symmetric plasticity function W. They analyze the phase portraits of this reduced model, compare them with the HH simulations, and use the model to predict regions in the (cp, cd) plane of the plasticity function where stable clusters, full synchronization, or full decoupling occur.

Significance. If correct, the paper offers a concrete and physiologically plausible mechanism by which a population of tonically firing neurons with adaptive synapses can generate slow modulations of the population mean field, relevant to LFP/EEG/BOLD observations. The two-cluster reduction is attractive because it reduces a high-dimensional spiking network to a planar system with an explicit design criterion for plasticity rules that produce clusters. The paper gives credit to the approximate nature of the reduction and supports the main phenomenon with several numerical realizations and a robustness test under random inputs. However, the quantitative correspondence claimed in Fig. 13 is not yet fully established because the averaging step used to derive G is not validated for the reported detuning, and because key parameter values (delta, omega, and sometimes epsilon) are not reported.

major comments (3)
  1. [Model derivation (Eqs. (8)-(9))] The derivation of sigma_dot = epsilon G(phi) assumes that, for a fixed phase difference phi, the two inter-cluster spike intervals per cycle are DeltaT and T-DeltaT with DeltaT approximately (phi mod 2pi)/omega_bar. For clusters with different frequencies, the phase difference at successive spike encounters advances by about 2pi omega/omega_bar, so the actual sequence of intervals follows a circle map and the average STDP update over a beat cycle is not generally equal to (delta omega_bar / 2pi) G(phi). The error is of order (omega/omega_bar) times the slope of W, which is largest near phi=0 where W is steep and where the decision between cluster fusion and separation is made. Because the paper does not report the effective frequency mismatch omega of the HH two-cluster states underlying Figs. 12-13, the claimed correspondence between the reduced-model boundary in Fig. 13(A) and the HH results in Fig. 13(B) is not yet quantitatively verified.
  2. [Simulation parameters (Eq. (2); Figs. 12-13)] The STDP update size delta in Eq. (2) is never specified, and the frequency mismatch omega used for the reduced model is not given in the captions of Figs. 12 and 13; the Fig. 11 captions state omega = 0.037 kHz, omega = 0.06 kHz, and epsilon = 0.08, but Fig. 13 does not state whether the same values were used. The reduced-model fixed point and the stability criterion sigma(phi*) = sigma* depend on omega through alpha = asin(omega/sigma_max), and the value of sigma(phi*) obtained by integrating system (10)-(11) from (-phi*,0) depends on epsilon. Without these parameter values, the simulations cannot be reproduced and the comparison in Fig. 13 cannot be checked.
  3. [Criteria for the emergence of clusters (Fig. 13(B))] The HH classification labels a parameter set as stable-two-clusters if the clusters 'stay apart after the simulation time 3000 ms.' Earlier in the paper, the smaller cluster is reported to reach its final state only at t approximately 17000 for another realization, so a 3000 ms cutoff may misclassify slowly fusing clusters as stable. The authors should justify this threshold or report that the classification is unchanged for longer simulation times.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Properties of the model (paragraph after Eq. (11))] The nullcline labels appear to be swapped: from the equations, G(phi)=0 gives the sigma-nullcline as the vertical lines phi = phi* and phi = -phi*, while sigma = omega/sin(phi+alpha) is the phi-nullcline; the text states the opposite.
  2. [Fig. 13 caption] Please state the values of omega, epsilon, delta, and sigma_max used for panel (A), and the precise numerical protocol used for panel (B), including the integration time and how the final state was classified.
  3. [Fig. 11 caption] The entry 'omega approximately 0.455 Hz' appears to be in different units from the other entries in the same caption, which are given in kHz; please correct the units.
  4. [Results, 'Numerical observation'] The term 'hierarchical in size' is used descriptively; a short sentence defining the sense in which the cluster structure is hierarchical (e.g., each newly formed cluster is markedly smaller than the preceding one) would improve precision.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: G(phi) is derived from the STDP rule W by an explicit common-period approximation, and the cluster-stability condition is an internal model criterion compared with direct HH simulations.

full rationale

The central derivation chain is not circular. The phenomenological model's coupling update is obtained by explicit averaging: for a phase difference phi and common period T=2*pi/omega_bar, the two per-period STDP updates sum to (delta*omega_bar/2*pi)G(phi), with G defined directly in terms of the plasticity function W (Eqs. (8)-(9)). This is a modeling approximation, not a restatement of the clustering outcome. The phase equation sigma_dot = epsilon G(phi) and the bounded sigma evolution (Eqs. (10)-(11)) are then analyzed internally; the stability boundary sigma(phi*)<sigma* is a consequence of the model's nullclines and saddle-manifold geometry, not of any fitted target. The comparison with the Hodgkin-Huxley network in Fig. 13(A)-(B) sweeps the plasticity parameters (cp, cd) and compares the model's qualitative regime boundary with direct HH simulations; no parameter of the model is reported as fitted to the HH outcomes in that figure. The paper's own caveat that 'depending on the frequency difference between the clusters, the set of parameters allowing stable cluster states may change its size' is an honest sensitivity limitation, not a circular reduction. Self-citations [37,38,39] provide background on hierarchical clustering in adaptive phase-oscillator networks and on prior spiking-neuron cluster observations, but they are not used as a uniqueness theorem or as the load-bearing justification of the present derivation. The ansatz F(phi)=sigma sin(phi+alpha) is explicitly declared as a first-Fourier-harmonic simplification, and alpha is chosen to place the synchronized state at sigma=sigma_max; this is a stated modeling choice rather than a hidden reuse of the target result. No equation-level equivalence or fitted-variable-as-prediction step was found, so the paper is self-contained against its own HH benchmark and should receive a low circularity score.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new physical entities are introduced. The central claim depends on the phase-reduction assumption, the periodic-spiking approximation used to derive G, the hand-chosen adaptation rate epsilon, and the frequency mismatch omega taken from the HH system rather than derived. The missing STDP step size delta is a crucial free parameter for the full network simulations.

free parameters (3)
  • delta (STDP update size) = not stated
    Controls the increment of synaptic weights in Eq. (2); required to simulate the HH network but no numerical value or range is provided in the text.
  • omega (frequency mismatch in reduced model) = e.g., 0.037 kHz and 0.06 kHz in Fig. 11; not specified in Fig. 13(A)
    The natural frequency difference between clusters in the phenomenological model; values are taken from HH simulations rather than derived, and the stability diagrams depend on it.
  • epsilon (adaptation rate in reduced model) = 0.08 in Fig. 11; not specified in Fig. 13(A)
    Sets the timescale of the coupling adaptation sigma_dot = epsilon G(phi); chosen by hand and not derived from HH parameters.
assumptions (5)
  • ad hoc to paper Phase reduction applies to the weakly coupled HH clusters, reducing each cluster to a single phase oscillator with interaction function F(phi)=sigma sin(phi+alpha).
    Invoked in 'Model derivation'; the first-harmonic sinusoidal coupling is a modeling assumption, not derived from the HH equations.
  • domain assumption Cluster spiking is approximately periodic with common period T about 2*pi/omega_bar, so the averaged STDP update per unit time is delta*omega_bar/(2*pi) G(phi).
    Used to derive Eq. (8); ignores variations of the spiking period during in-phase episodes, which the HH simulations show can be significant (Fig. 8G,H).
  • domain assumption The coupling sigma is proportional to the mean inter-cluster coupling and evolves slowly (epsilon small, timescale separation).
    Assumed to justify sigma_dot = epsilon G(phi); requires the STDP update size delta to be small relative to the neuronal period.
  • ad hoc to paper The synchronized cluster state has phase difference phi=0, fixing alpha = asin(omega/sigma_max).
    Introduced to set the synchronized equilibrium at phi=0; alpha is a normalization rather than an independent empirical input.
  • standard math Isochrons and weak-coupling phase dynamics exist for the HH neuron (Guckenheimer, Winfree, Pikovsky et al.).
    Basis for writing Eqs. (5)-(6); cited from refs. [46-49].

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Hierarchical clusters in neuronal populations with plasticity." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/YHXJONJV

@misc{pith2026190804103,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Hierarchical clusters in neuronal populations with plasticity},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/YHXJONJV}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.04103}
}
read the original abstract

We report the phenomenon of frequency clustering in a network of Hodgkin-Huxley neurons with spike timing-dependent plasticity. The clustering leads to a splitting of a neural population into a few groups synchronized at different frequencies. In this regime, the amplitude of the mean field undergoes low-frequency modulations, which may contribute to the mechanism of the emergence of slow oscillations of neural activity observed in spectral power of local field potentials or electroencephalographic signals at high frequencies. In addition to numerical simulations of such multi-clusters, we investigate the mechanisms of the observed phenomena using the simplest case of two clusters. In particular, we propose a phenomenological model which describes the dynamics of two clusters taking into account the adaptation of coupling weights. We also determine the set of plasticity functions (update rules), which lead to multi-clustering.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.04103 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Plasticity function W(∆tij ) for τp = 2, τd = 5, cp = 2, cd = 1.6 phenomena: complete synchronization and the emergence of frequency clusters hierarchical in size, see Figs. 2 and 3, respectively [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Synchronization into one Cluster Evolution of the coupling matrix κij (t) starting from random initial conditions and converging to a completely synchronous state. Panel (A) shows initial coupling matrix, (B) the coupling matrix after the transient t = 2000ms. Raster plot of spiking times at the beginning of simulations (C) and after the transient (D). The asymptotic state (B,D) is a completely synchronized spiking … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Frequency clusters Evolution of the coupling matrix κij (t) starting from random initial conditions and converging to frequency clusters hierarchical in size. Panel (A) shows ini￾tial coupling matrix, (B) the coupling matrix after the transient t = 5600ms, and (C) t = 20000ms. (B-F) Corresponding raster plots of spike times. The asymptotic state (C,F) is a hierarchical cluster state with the coupling weights κij pot… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (10 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Cluster formation Formation of individual clusters over time (corresponds to the dynamical sce￾nario in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Three-cluster state Example of a three-cluster state for N = 500, τp = 2, τd = 5, cp = 2, cd = 1.6, and κmax = 1.5 with a random initial distribution of κij in [0, 0.75]. initialized with the same initial conditions, so the clusters are fully synchronized at t = 0 [PI…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Influence of independent random input on clusters Coupling matrices for t = 10000ms and different amplitudes of independent random input I (see Eq. (4)). (A) I = 0.005, (B) I = 0.01, (C) I = 0.02, (D) I = 0.05 and (E) I=0.07. All other parameters as in [PITH_FULL_IMAG…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Cluster frequencies and time until fusion (A) Difference between synchronization frequencies of the two clusters for dif￾ferent size of the smaller cluster Ns. (B) Time until cluster fusion for different initial size of the smaller cluster Ns. stable is certainly model…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Two cases: Fusion and stable clusters Evolution of the coupling matrix for N = 50 and the number of neurons Ns = 8 (A)-(C) and Ns = 9 (D)-(F) in the small cluster. In panels (A)-(C) the clusters are stable, while in (D)-(F) they are merging to one synchronous cluster. …
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Mean synaptic activity Mean synaptic activity S(t) of the neural population in the case of stable two cluster state. Panel (A) shows the dynamics of S(t) on the time interval of 12 s, where modulation of the amplitude (blue line) is visible, while the fast oscillations…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Update function G (A) Update function G(ϕ) for τp = 2, τd = 5, cp = 2, and cd = 1.6. (B) Schematic spiking of two oscillators with spike time difference ∆T and periods close to T. Properties of the model Phase space of system (10)-(11) is two dimensional with (ϕ, σ) ∈…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Phase portrait phenomenological model Phase portraits of model (10)-(11) for (A) monostable regime of complete syn￾chronization; (B) co-existence of stable synchronized and clustered states; and (C) bifurcation moment of transition between the phase portraits illustra…
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Phase portrait Hodgkin-Huxley model Dynamics of the phase difference between the clusters ϕHH and mean inter￾cluster coupling σHH for the solutions of the HH system (1)-(3) for different initial conditions. N = 50 with Ns = 7 neurons in the small cluster and Nb = 43 i…
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Parameter (cp, cd)-plane of the plasticity function Panel (A): system (10)-(11). White region: stable periodic solution coexisting with a stable fixed point, case II. Black region: globally stable fixed point, case I. Grey region: globally stable periodic solution wit…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

61 extracted references · 46 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Malleability of Spike-Timing-Dependent Plasticity at the CA3-CA1 Synapse

    Wittenberg GM, Wang SSH. Malleability of Spike-Timing-Dependent Plasticity at the CA3-CA1 Synapse. J Neurosci. 2006;26(24):6610–6617. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5388-05.2006

    work page doi:10.1523/jneurosci.5388-05.2006 2006

  2. [2]

    Spike-timing-dependent plasticity: common themes and divergent vistas

    Kepecs A, van Rossum MCW, Song S, Tagner J. Spike-timing-dependent plasticity: common themes and divergent vistas. Biol Cybern. 2002;87:446– 458

    work page 2002

  3. [3]

    Electrophysiological signatures of resting state networks in the hu- man brain

    Mantini D, Perrucci MG, Del Gratta C, Romani GL, Corbetta M. Electrophysiological signatures of resting state networks in the hu- man brain. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007;104(32):13170–13175. doi:10.1073/pnas.0700668104

    work page doi:10.1073/pnas.0700668104 2007

  4. [4]

    The Am- plitude and Timing of the BOLD Signal Reflects the Relationship be- tween Local Field Potential Power at Different Frequencies

    Magri C, Schridde U, Murayama Y, Panzeri S, Logothetis NK. The Am- plitude and Timing of the BOLD Signal Reflects the Relationship be- tween Local Field Potential Power at Different Frequencies. J Neurosci. 2012;32(4):1395–1407. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3985-11.2012. 20

    work page doi:10.1523/jneurosci.3985-11.2012 2012

  5. [5]

    Intrinsic and Task-Evoked Network Architectures of the Human Brain

    Cole MW, Bassett DS, Power JD, Braver TS, Petersen SE. Intrinsic and Task-Evoked Network Architectures of the Human Brain. Neuron. 2014;83(1):238–251. doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2014.05.014

    doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2014.05.014 2014

  6. [6]

    Functional Connectiv- ity’s Degenerate View of Brain Computation

    Marrelec G, Messe A, Giron A, Rudrauf D. Functional Connectiv- ity’s Degenerate View of Brain Computation. PLoS Comput Biol. 2016;12(10):e1005031. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005031

    doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005031 2016

  7. [7]

    Correspondence Between Evoked and Intrinsic Functional Brain Network Configurations

    Bolt T, Nomi JS, Rubinov M, Uddin LQ. Correspondence Between Evoked and Intrinsic Functional Brain Network Configurations. Hum Brain Mapp. 2017;38(4):1992–2007. doi:10.1002/hbm.23500

    work page doi:10.1002/hbm.23500 2017

  8. [8]

    The Hierar- chical Organization of the Default, Dorsal Attention and Salience Net- works in Adolescents and Young Adults

    Zhou Y, Friston KJ, Zeidman P, Chen J, Li S, Razi A. The Hierar- chical Organization of the Default, Dorsal Attention and Salience Net- works in Adolescents and Young Adults. Cereb Cortex. 2018;28(2):726–737. doi:10.1093/cercor/bhx307

    work page doi:10.1093/cercor/bhx307 2018

Show all 61 references
  1. [9]

    Competitive and co- operative dynamics of large-scale brain functional networks supporting recollection

    Fornito A, Harrison BJ, Zalesky A, Simons JS. Competitive and co- operative dynamics of large-scale brain functional networks supporting recollection. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012;109(31):12788–12793. doi:10.1073/pnas.1204185109

    2012 doi

  2. [10]

    Principal components of functional connectivity: A new approach to study dynamic brain connectivity during rest

    Leonardi N, Richiardi J, Gschwind M, Simioni S, Annoni JM, Schluep M, et al. Principal components of functional connectivity: A new approach to study dynamic brain connectivity during rest. Neuroimage. 2013;83:937–

    2013

  3. [11]

    Tracking Whole-Brain Connectivity Dynamics in the Resting State

    Allen EA, Damaraju E, Plis SM, Erhardt EB, Eichele T, Calhoun VD. Tracking Whole-Brain Connectivity Dynamics in the Resting State. Cereb Cortex. 2014;24(3):663–676. doi:10.1093/cercor/bhs352

    2014 doi

  4. [12]

    Dynamic functional connectivity analysis reveals transient states of dysconnectivity in schizophrenia

    Damaraju E, Allen EA, Belger A, Ford JM, McEwen S, Mathalon DH, et al. Dynamic functional connectivity analysis reveals transient states of dysconnectivity in schizophrenia. Neuroimage-clinical. 2014;5:298–308. doi:10.1016/j.nicl.2014.07.003

    2014 doi

  5. [13]

    Neural Synchrony in Brain Disorders: Relevance for Cognitive Dysfunctions and Pathophysiology

    Uhlhaas PJ, Singer W. Neural Synchrony in Brain Disorders: Relevance for Cognitive Dysfunctions and Pathophysiology. Neuron. 2006;52(1):155 –

    2006

  6. [14]

    Neuronal dynamics: From single neurons to networks and models of cognition; 2014

    Gerstner W, Kistler WM, Naud R, Paninski L. Neuronal dynamics: From single neurons to networks and models of cognition; 2014

    2014

  7. [15]

    The organization of behavior: A neuropsychological approach

    Hebb DO. The organization of behavior: A neuropsychological approach. John Wiley & Sons; 1949

    1949

  8. [16]

    Long-term synaptic potentia- tion

    Brown T, Chapman P, Kairiss E, Keenan C. Long-term synaptic potentia- tion. Science (80- ). 1988;242(4879):724–728. doi:10.1126/science.2903551. 21

    1988 doi

  9. [17]

    A synaptic model of memory: long- term potentiation in the hippocampus

    Bliss TVP, Collingridge GL. A synaptic model of memory: long- term potentiation in the hippocampus. Nature. 1993;361(6407):31–39. doi:10.1038/361031a0

    1993 doi

  10. [18]

    A neuronal learning rule for sub-millisecond temporal coding

    Gerstner W, Kempter R, van Hemmen JL, Wagner H. A neuronal learning rule for sub-millisecond temporal coding. Nature. 1996;383(6595):76–78. doi:10.1038/383076a0

    1996 doi

  11. [19]

    Regulation of Synaptic Efficacy by Coincidence of Post- synaptic APs and EPSPs

    Markram H. Regulation of Synaptic Efficacy by Coincidence of Post- synaptic APs and EPSPs. Science (80- ). 1997;275(5297):213–215. doi:10.1126/science.275.5297.213

    1997 doi

  12. [20]

    Synaptic Modifications in Cultured Hippocam- pal Neurons: Dependence on Spike Timing, Synaptic Strength, and Postsynaptic Cell Type

    Bi Gq, Poo Mm. Synaptic Modifications in Cultured Hippocam- pal Neurons: Dependence on Spike Timing, Synaptic Strength, and Postsynaptic Cell Type. J Neurosci. 1998;18(24):10464–10472. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.18-24-10464.1998

    1998

  13. [21]

    Synaptic plasticity: Taming the beast

    Abbott LF, Nelson SB. Synaptic plasticity: Taming the beast. Nat Neu- rosci. 2000;3(11s):1178–1183. doi:10.1038/81453

    2000 doi

  14. [22]

    Synaptic Modification by Correlated Activity: Hebb’s Postulate Revisited

    Bi Gq, Poo Mm. Synaptic Modification by Correlated Activity: Hebb’s Postulate Revisited. Annu Rev Neurosci. 2001;24(1):139–166. doi:10.1146/annurev.neuro.24.1.139

    2001 doi

  15. [23]

    Synaptic organizations and dynamical properties of weakly connected neural oscillators II

    Hoppensteadt FC, Izhikevich EM. Synaptic organizations and dynamical properties of weakly connected neural oscillators II. Learning phase infor- mation. Biol Cybern. 1996;75(2):129–135. doi:10.1007/s004220050280

    1996 doi

  16. [24]

    Plasticity and learning in a net- work of coupled phase oscillators

    Seliger P, Young SC, Tsimring LS. Plasticity and learning in a net- work of coupled phase oscillators. Phys Rev E. 2002;65(4):041906. doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.65.041906

    2002 doi

  17. [25]

    Connectivity reflects cod- ing: a model of voltage-based STDP with homeostasis

    Clopath C, B¨ using L, Vasilaki E, Gerstner W. Connectivity reflects cod- ing: a model of voltage-based STDP with homeostasis. Nat Neurosci. 2010;13(3):344–352. doi:10.1038/nn.2479

    2010 doi

  18. [26]

    Unlearning tinnitus-related cerebral synchrony with acoustic coordinated reset stimulation: theoretical concept and mod- elling

    Tass PA, Popovych OV. Unlearning tinnitus-related cerebral synchrony with acoustic coordinated reset stimulation: theoretical concept and mod- elling. Biol Cybern. 2012;106:27–36. doi:10.1007/s00422-012-0479-5

    2012 doi

  19. [27]

    Long-term anti-kindling effects of desynchronizing brain stimulation: a theoretical study

    Tass PA, Majtanik M. Long-term anti-kindling effects of desynchronizing brain stimulation: a theoretical study. Biol Cybern. 2006;94(1):58–66

    2006

  20. [28]

    Self-organized noise resistance of oscillatory neural networks with spike timing-dependent plasticity

    Popovych O, Yanchuk S, Tass PAPA. Self-organized noise resistance of oscillatory neural networks with spike timing-dependent plasticity. Sci Rep. 2013;3(1):2926. doi:10.1038/srep02926

    2013 doi

  21. [29]

    Noise-enhanced cou- pling between two oscillators with long-term plasticity

    L¨ ucken L, Popovych OV, Tass PA, Yanchuk S. Noise-enhanced cou- pling between two oscillators with long-term plasticity. Phys Rev E. 2016;93(3):032210. doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.93.032210. 22

    2016 doi

  22. [30]

    Multi-scale detection of hierarchical community architecture in struc- tural and functional brain networks

    Ashourvan A, Telesford QK, Verstynen T, Vettel JM, Bassett DS. Multi-scale detection of hierarchical community architecture in struc- tural and functional brain networks. PLOS ONE. 2019;14(5):1–36. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0215520

    2019 doi

  23. [31]

    Hierarchical Organization of Human Corti- cal Networks in Health and Schizophrenia

    Bassett DS, Bullmore E, Verchinski BA, Mattay VS, Weinberger DR, Meyer-Lindenberg A. Hierarchical Organization of Human Corti- cal Networks in Health and Schizophrenia. Journal of Neuroscience. 2008;28(37):9239–9248. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1929-08.2008

    2008 doi

  24. [32]

    Efficient Physical Embedding of Topologically Complex Information Processing Networks in Brains and Computer Circuits

    Bassett DS, Greenfield DL, Meyer-Lindenberg A, Weinberger DR, Moore SW, Bullmore ET. Efficient Physical Embedding of Topologically Complex Information Processing Networks in Brains and Computer Circuits. PLOS Computational Biology. 2010;6(4):1–14. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000748

    2010 doi

  25. [33]

    The modular organization of human anatomical brain networks: Accounting for the cost of wiring

    Betzel RF, Medaglia JD, Papadopoulos L, Baum GL, Gur R, Gur R, et al. The modular organization of human anatomical brain networks: Accounting for the cost of wiring. Network Neuroscience. 2017;1(1):42–68. doi:10.1162/NETN a 00002

    2017 doi

  26. [34]

    Resolving Anatomical and Functional Structure in Human Brain Organization: Identifying Mesoscale Organization in Weighted Network Representations

    Lohse C, Bassett DS, Lim KO, Carlson JM. Resolving Anatomical and Functional Structure in Human Brain Organization: Identifying Mesoscale Organization in Weighted Network Representations. PLOS Computational Biology. 2014;10(10):1–17. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003712

    2014 doi

  27. [35]

    Self-organized network of phase oscillators cou- pled by activity-dependent interactions

    Aoki T, Aoyagi T. Self-organized network of phase oscillators cou- pled by activity-dependent interactions. Phys Rev E. 2011;84(6):66109. doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.84.066109

    2011 doi

  28. [36]

    Self-organized emergence of multilayer structure and chimera states in dynamical networks with adaptive couplings

    Kasatkin DV, Yanchuk S, Sch¨ oll E, Nekorkin VI. Self-organized emergence of multilayer structure and chimera states in dynamical networks with adaptive couplings. Phys Rev E. 2017;96(6):062211. doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.96.062211

    2017 doi

  29. [37]

    Multi-clusters in networks of adaptively coupled phase oscillators networks

    Berner R, Sch¨ oll E, Yanchuk S. Multi-clusters in networks of adaptively coupled phase oscillators networks. SIAM J Appl Dyn Syst (to appear)

  30. [38]

    Hierarchical frequency clusters in adaptive networks of phase oscillators

    Berner R, Fialkowski J, Kasatkin D, Nekorkin V, Yanchuk S, Sch¨ oll E. Hierarchical frequency clusters in adaptive networks of phase oscillators. Chaos (to appear)

  31. [39]

    The Spacing Principle for Un- learning Abnormal Neuronal Synchrony

    Popovych OV, Xenakis MN, Tass PA. The Spacing Principle for Un- learning Abnormal Neuronal Synchrony. PLoS One. 2015;10(2):e0117205. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0117205

    2015 doi

  32. [40]

    Very Slow EEG Fluctua- tions Predict the Dynamics of Stimulus Detection and Oscillation Am- plitudes in Humans

    Monto S, Palva S, Voipio J, Palva JM. Very Slow EEG Fluctua- tions Predict the Dynamics of Stimulus Detection and Oscillation Am- plitudes in Humans. Journal of Neuroscience. 2008;28(33):8268–8272. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1910-08.2008. 23

    2008 doi

  33. [41]

    Slow modulations of high-frequency activity (40-140 Hz) discriminate preictal changes in human focal epilepsy

    Alvarado-Rojas C, Valderrama M, Fouad A, Ihle M, Teixeira C, Sales F, et al. Slow modulations of high-frequency activity (40-140 Hz) discriminate preictal changes in human focal epilepsy. Scientific reports. 2014;4:4545. doi:10.1038/srep04545

    2014 doi

  34. [42]

    Mul- tistability in the Kuramoto model with synaptic plasticity

    Maistrenko YL, Lysyansky B, Hauptmann C, Burylko O, Tass PA. Mul- tistability in the Kuramoto model with synaptic plasticity. Phys Rev E. 2007;75(6):066207. Nonlinearity 2016;29(5):1468–1486

    2007

  35. [43]

    Interplay between a phase response curve and spike-timing-dependent plasticity leading to wireless clustering

    Cateau H, Kitano K, Fukai T. Interplay between a phase response curve and spike-timing-dependent plasticity leading to wireless clustering. Phys Rev E. 2008;77(5):051909. doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.77.051909

    2008 doi

  36. [44]

    A quantitative description of membrane current and its application to conduction and excitation in nerve

    Hodgkin A, Huxley A. A quantitative description of membrane current and its application to conduction and excitation in nerve. Bull Math Biol. 1990;52(1-2):25–71. doi:10.1016/S0092-8240(05)80004-7

    1990 doi

  37. [45]

    Phase Dynamics for Weakly Cou- pled Hodgkin-Huxley Neurons

    Hansel D, Mato G, Meunier C. Phase Dynamics for Weakly Cou- pled Hodgkin-Huxley Neurons. Europhys Lett. 1993;23(5):367–372. doi:10.1209/0295-5075/23/5/011

    1993 doi

  38. [46]

    Weakly Connected Neural Networks

    Hoppensteadt FC, Izhikevich EM. Weakly Connected Neural Networks. Springer-Verlag, New York; 1997

    1997

  39. [47]

    Synchronization.{A} Universal Con- cept in Nonlinear Sciences

    Pikovsky A, Rosenblum M, Kurths J. Synchronization.{A} Universal Con- cept in Nonlinear Sciences. Cambridge University Press; 2001

    2001

  40. [48]

    Isochrons and phaseless sets

    Guckenheimer J. Isochrons and phaseless sets. J Math Biol. 1975;1(3):259–

    1975

  41. [49]

    The Geometry of Biological Time

    Winfree AT. The Geometry of Biological Time. vol. 12. Springer

  42. [50]

    Competitive Hebbian learning through spike-timing-dependent synapticplasticity

    Song S, Miller KD, Abbott LF. Competitive Hebbian learning through spike-timing-dependent synapticplasticity. Nat Neurosci. 2000;3(9):919–

    2000

  43. [51]

    Equilibrium Properties of Tempo- rally Asymmetric Hebbian Plasticity

    Rubin J, Lee DD, Sompolinsky H. Equilibrium Properties of Tempo- rally Asymmetric Hebbian Plasticity. Phys Rev Lett. 2001;86(2):364–367. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.86.364

    2001 doi

  44. [52]

    Key role of coupling, delay, and noise in resting brain fluctuations

    Deco G, Jirsa V, McIntosh AR, Sporns O, Kotter R. Key role of coupling, delay, and noise in resting brain fluctuations. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009;106(25):10302–10307. doi:10.1073/pnas.0901831106

    2009 doi

  45. [53]

    Resting-State Temporal Synchronization Networks Emerge from Connectivity Topology and Heterogeneity

    Ponce-Alvarez A, Deco G, Hagmann P, Romani GL, Mantini D, Cor- betta M. Resting-State Temporal Synchronization Networks Emerge from Connectivity Topology and Heterogeneity. PLoS Comput Biol. 2015;11(2):UNSP e1004100. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1004100. 24

    2015 doi

  46. [54]

    Model of thalamo- cortical slow-wave sleep oscillations and transitions to activated states

    Bazhenov M, Timofeev I, Steriade M, Sejnowski TJ. Model of thalamo- cortical slow-wave sleep oscillations and transitions to activated states. J Neurosci. 2002;22(19):8691–8704

    2002

  47. [55]

    Cellular and network mechanisms of slow oscillatory activity (¡ 1 Hz) and wave propa- gations in a cortical network model

    Compte A, Sanchez-Vives MV, McCormick DA, Wang XJ. Cellular and network mechanisms of slow oscillatory activity (¡ 1 Hz) and wave propa- gations in a cortical network model. J Neurophysiol. 2003;89(5):2707–2725. doi:10.1152/jn.00845.2002

    2003

  48. [56]

    Weak chimeras in minimal networks of coupled phase oscillators

    Ashwin P, Burylko O. Weak chimeras in minimal networks of coupled phase oscillators. Chaos 2015;25(1):13106

    2015

  49. [57]

    Chaotic weak chimeras and their persistence in cou- pled populations of phase oscillators

    Bick C, Ashwin P. Chaotic weak chimeras and their persistence in cou- pled populations of phase oscillators. Nonlinearity 2016;29(5):1468–1486. doi:10.1088/0951-7715/29/5/1468 25

    2016 doi

  50. [168]

    doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2006.09.020

    2006 doi

  51. [273]

    doi:10.1007/BF01273747

    doi

  52. [950]

    doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.07.019

    2013 doi

  53. [2001]

    Available from: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/ 978-1-4757-3484-3

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.