Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Access by Xinjiang University

Statistically inferred neuronal connections in subsampled neural networks strongly correlate with spike train covariances

Tong Liang1,2 and Braden A. W. Brinkman2,*

  • 1Department of Physics and Astronomy, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, New York 11794, USA
  • 2Department of Neurobiology and Behavior, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, New York 11794, USA

  • *braden.brinkman@stonybrook.edu

Phys. Rev. E 109, 044404 – Published 5 April, 2024

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.109.044404

Abstract

Statistically inferred neuronal connections from observed spike train data are often skewed from ground truth by factors such as model mismatch, unobserved neurons, and limited data. Spike train covariances, sometimes referred to as “functional connections,” are often used as a proxy for the connections between pairs of neurons, but reflect statistical relationships between neurons, not anatomical connections. Moreover, covariances are not causal: spiking activity is correlated in both the past and the future, whereas neurons respond only to synaptic inputs in the past. Connections inferred by maximum likelihood inference, however, can be constrained to be causal. However, we show in this work that the inferred connections in spontaneously active networks modeled by stochastic leaky integrate-and-fire networks strongly correlate with the covariances between neurons, and may reflect noncausal relationships, when many neurons are unobserved or when neurons are weakly coupled. This phenomenon occurs across different network structures, including random networks and balanced excitatory-inhibitory networks. We use a combination of simulations and a mean-field analysis with fluctuation corrections to elucidate the relationships between spike train covariances, inferred synaptic filters, and ground-truth connections in partially observed networks.

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (43)

  1. J. W. Pillow, J. Shlens, L. Paninski, A. Sher, A. M. Litke, E. Chichilnisky, and E. P. Simoncelli, Nature (London) 454, 995 (2008).
  2. D. Soudry, S. Keshri, P. Stinson, M.-H. Oh, G. Iyengar, and L. Paninski, PLoS Comput. Biol. 11, e1004464 (2015).
  3. Y. V. Zaytsev, A. Morrison, and M. Deger, J. Comput. Neurosci. 39, 77 (2015).
  4. M. E. Lepperød, T. Stöber, T. Hafting, M. Fyhn, and K. P. Kording, PLoS Comput. Biol., 19, e1011574 (2023).
  5. D. Q. Nykamp, Math. Biosci. 205, 204 (2007).
  6. I. H. Stevenson, J. M. Rebesco, L. E. Miller, and K. P. Körding, Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 18, 582 (2008).
  7. F. Gerhard, T. Kispersky, G. J. Gutierrez, E. Marder, M. Kramer, and U. Eden, PLoS Comput. Biol. 9, e1003138 (2013).
  8. M. Volgushev, V. Ilin, and I. H. Stevenson, PLoS Comput. Biol. 11, e1004167 (2015).
  9. R. Mohanty, W. A. Sethares, V. A. Nair, and V. Prabhakaran, Sci. Rep. 10, 1298 (2020).
  10. G. K. Ocker, K. Josić, E. Shea-Brown, and M. A. Buice, PLoS Comput. Biol. 13, e1005583 (2017).
  11. B. A. Brinkman, F. Rieke, E. Shea-Brown, and M. A. Buice, PLoS Comput. Biol. 14, e1006490 (2018).
  12. D. Dahmen, S. Grün, M. Diesmann, and M. Helias, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 116, 13051 (2019).
  13. A. Das and I. R. Fiete, Nat. Neurosci. 23, 1286 (2020).
  14. S. Ostojic and N. Brunel, PLoS Comput. Biol. 7, e1001056 (2011).
  15. A. I. Weber and J. W. Pillow, Neural Comput. 29, 3260 (2017).
  16. I. M. Park, M. L. Meister, A. C. Huk, and J. W. Pillow, Nat. Neurosci. 17, 1395 (2014).
  17. M. T. Schaub, Y. N. Billeh, C. A. Anastassiou, C. Koch, and M. Barahona, PLoS Comput. Biol. 11, e1004196 (2015).
  18. T. Rost, M. Deger, and M. P. Nawrot, Biol. Cybern. 112, 81 (2018).
  19. C. C. Chow and M. A. Buice, J. Math. Neurosc. 5, 8 (2015).
  20. R. Kubo, Rep. Prog. Phys. 29, 255 (1966).
  21. A. V. Kisil, I. D. Abrahams, G. Mishuris, and S. V. Rogosin, Proc. R. Soc. A. 477, 20210533 (2021).
  22. M. Vidne, Y. Ahmadian, J. Shlens, J. W. Pillow, J. Kulkarni, A. M. Litke, E. Chichilnisky, E. Simoncelli, and L. Paninski, J. Comput. Neurosci. 33, 97 (2012).
  23. V. Pernice and S. Rotter, J. Stat. Mech. (2013) P03008.
  24. J. Schiefer, A. Niederbühl, V. Pernice, C. Lennartz, J. Hennig, P. LeVan, and S. Rotter, PLoS Comput. Biol. 14, e1006056 (2018).
  25. J. Pillow and P. Latham, Adv. Neural Info. Process. Syst. 20 (2007).
  26. B. Dunn and Y. Roudi, Phys. Rev. E 87, 022127 (2013).
  27. J. Tyrcha and J. Hertz, Math. Biosci. Eng 11, 149 (2014).
  28. S. Wang, V. Schmutz, G. Bellec, and W. Gerstner, Adv. Neural Inf. Proc. Syst. 35, 23566 (2022).
  29. S. Kim, D. Putrino, S. Ghosh, and E. N. Brown, PLoS Comput. Biol. 7, e1001110 (2011).
  30. C. J. Quinn, T. P. Coleman, N. Kiyavash, and N. G. Hatsopoulos, J. Comput. Neurosci. 30, 17 (2011).
  31. D. Zhou, Y. Xiao, Y. Zhang, Z. Xu, and D. Cai, PLoS ONE 9, e87636 (2014).
  32. R. Kobayashi, S. Kurita, A. Kurth, K. Kitano, K. Mizuseki, M. Diesmann, B. J. Richmond, and S. Shinomoto, Nat. Commun. 10, 4468 (2019).
  33. R. Biswas and E. Shlizerman, Front. Syst. Neurosci. 16, 817962 (2022).
  34. M. Maziarz, J. Philos. Econ.: Reflect. Econ. Soc. Issues 8, 86 (2015).
  35. L. Paninski, Network 15, 243 (2004).
  36. G. K. Ocker, Phys. Rev. X 13, 041047 (2023).
  37. D. F. English, S. McKenzie, T. Evans, K. Kim, E. Yoon, and G. Buzsáki, Neuron 96, 505 (2017).
  38. K. Kim, M. Vöröslakos, J. P. Seymour, K. D. Wise, G. Buzsáki, and E. Yoon, Nat. Commun. 11, 2063 (2020).
  39. F. Randi, A. K. Sharma, S. Dvali, and A. M. Leifer, Nature (London) 623, 406 (2023).
  40. G. B. Ermentrout and D. H. Terman, Mathematical Foundations of Neuroscience (Springer, Berlin, 2010), pp. 157–170.
  41. F. Pedregosa, G. Varoquaux, A. Gramfort, V. Michel, B. Thirion, O. Grisel, M. Blondel, P. Prettenhofer, R. Weiss, V. Dubourg, J. Vanderplas, A. Passos, D. Cournapeau, M. Brucher, M. Perrot, and E. Duchesnay, J. Mach. Learn. Res. 12, 2825 (2011).
  42. M. Kordovan and S. Rotter, arXiv:2001.05057.
  43. Inverse of constant matrix plus diagonal matrix, StackExchange; accessed January 03, 2023, https://math. stackexchange.com/questions/840855/inverse-of-constant-matrix-plus-diagonal-matrix.

Outline

Information

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation