Cited by 102Neural dynamics and brain functionMemory and Neural MechanismsUndergraduate Neuroscience Education and Research

Discovering Precise Temporal Patterns in Large-Scale Neural Recordings through Robust and Interpretable Time Warping

Open access
Williams, Alex H., Poole, Ben, Maheswaranathan, Niru, Dhawale, Ashesh K., Fisher, Tucker, Wilson, Christopher D., Brann, David H., Trautmann, Eric M. +6 more·2020·Neuron

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Though the temporal precision of neural computation has been studied intensively, a data-driven determination of this precision remains a fundamental challenge. Reproducible spike patterns may be obscured on single trials by uncontrolled temporal variability in behavior and cognition and may not be time locked to measurable signatures in behavior or local field potentials (LFP). To overcome these challenges, we describe a general-purpose time warping framework that reveals precise spike-time patterns in an unsupervised manner, even when these patterns are decoupled from behavior or are temporally stretched across single trials. We demonstrate this method across diverse systems: cued reaching in nonhuman primates, motor sequence production in rats, and olfaction in mice. This approach flexibly uncovers diverse dynamical firing patterns, including pulsatile responses to behavioral events, LFP-aligned oscillatory spiking, and even unanticipated patterns, such as 7 Hz oscillations in rat motor cortex that are not time locked to measured behaviors or LFP.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neuron.2019.10.020

Cites

75 of 75 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • After applying a time-alignment method to reduce temporal variability, the neural activity showed consistent patterns that were specific to each character.

    “We used a time-alignment technique to remove temporal variability11, revealing remarkably consistent underlying patterns of neural activity that are unique to each character (Fig. 1c).”

    From High-performance brain-to-text communication via handwriting (2021) · cites this paper as [11]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Lam Siu Kwan, Pitrou Antoine, and Seibert Stanley (2015). “ Numba: A LLVM-based Python JIT Compiler”. Proceedings of the Second Workshop on the LLVM Compiler Infrastructure in HPC. LLVM ‘15 Austin, Texas: ACM, 7: 1– 7:6.
  2. Perry Patrick O. (2009). “ Cross-Validation for Unsupervised Learning”. PhD thesis Stanford University.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Williams, A. H., Poole, B., Maheswaranathan, N., Dhawale, A. K., Fisher, T., Wilson, C. D., Brann, D. H., Trautmann, E. M., Ryu, S., Shusterman, R., Rinberg, D., Ölveczky, B. P., Shenoy, K. V., & Ganguli, S.
Affiliations
  • Stanford University (US)
  • Google (United States) (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
  • New York University (US)
  • Howard Hughes Medical Institute (US)
  • Palo Alto Medical Foundation (US)
  • University of Oregon (US)
Corresponding author
  • Williams, Alex H.
  • Ganguli, Surya
Venue
Neuron
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-01
Volume
105
Issue
2
Pages
246-259.e8
ISSN
0896-6273 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2991597663
Cited by
102
References
75
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 3
FWCI
5.96
Type
journal article
Language
en
Update notices
erratum (2023-05-17)
Open access
Locations
  • Neuron (publishedVersion)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • OSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Burroughs Wellcome Fund
  • Simons Foundation (325380, 543045)
  • Howard Hughes Medical Institute
  • National Science Foundation (IGERT 0734683)
  • Office of Naval Research (N000141812158)
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (R01-DC013797, R01-NS099323-01, R01-DC014366)
  • Alfred P. Sloan Foundation
  • Charles A. King Trust
  • McKnight Foundation
  • Life Sciences Research Foundation
  • National Institutes of Health (1F31NS089376-01, 8DP1HD075623)
  • U.S. Department of Energy
  • James S. McDonnell Foundation
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Undergraduate Neuroscience Education and Research
Keywords
time warping, local field potentials, olfaction, motor cortex, non-human primates, rats, mice
MeSH terms
Action Potentials, Animals, Macaca mulatta, Male, Mice, Transgenic, Microinjections, Motor Cortex, Neurons, Pattern Recognition, Automated, Peptide Fragments, Proteins, Time Factors, Amyloid beta-Protein Precursor, Mice, Rats, Gene Knock-In Techniques, Primary Cell Culture

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review