Cited by 353Memory and Neural MechanismsNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchNeural dynamics and brain function

Memory retention – the synaptic stability versus plasticity dilemma

Abraham, Wickliffe C., Robins, Anthony·2005·Trends in Neurosciences

Abstract

Memory maintenance is widely believed to involve long-term retention of the synaptic weights that are set within relevant neural circuits during learning. However, despite recent exciting technical advances, it has not yet proved possible to confirm experimentally this intuitively appealing hypothesis. Artificial neural networks offer an alternative methodology as they permit continuous monitoring of individual connection weights during learning and retention. In such models, ongoing alterations in connection weights are required if a network is to retain previously stored material while learning new information. Thus, the duration of synaptic change does not necessarily define the persistence of a memory; rather, it is likely that a regulated balance of synaptic stability and synaptic plasticity is required for optimal memory retention in real neuronal circuits.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.tins.2004.12.003

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • The difficulty of simultaneously meeting plasticity and stability requirements is called the stability-plasticity dilemma.

    “This phenomenon is called the stability-plasticity dilemma [5].”

    From An Appraisal of Incremental Learning Methods (2020) · cites this paper as [5]

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 60 · Cited by 353

Authors
Abraham, W. C., & Robins, A.
Affiliations
University of Otago (NZ)
Corresponding author
Abraham, Wickliffe C.
Venue
Trends in Neurosciences
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2005-02
Volume
28
Issue
2
Pages
73-78
ISSN
0166-2236 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2143386621
Cited by
353
References
60
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 34 · 2023: 33 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 31 · 2020: 28 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 10
FWCI
0.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Trends in Neurosciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • University of Otago
  • Health Research Council of New Zealand
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
Keywords
memory retention, synaptic stability, synaptic plasticity, long-term memory, artificial neural networks, connection weights, memory maintenance, learning and retention
MeSH terms
Animals, Memory, Models, Neurological, Synaptic Transmission, Neuronal Plasticity, Synapses, Long-Term Potentiation

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