CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 113Neural dynamics and brain functionNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchNeural Networks and Applications

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 27 of the 28 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Brain power

Open access
Balasubramanian, Vijay·2021·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
DOI 10.1073/pnas.2107022118PMC PMC8364152
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The human brain is just 2% of the body’s weight, but 20% of its metabolic load (1⇓–3), and 10 times more expensive per gram than muscle. On the other hand, the brain manages to produce poetry, design spacecraft, and create art on an energy budget of ∼20 W, a paltry sum given that the computer on which this article is being typed requires 80 W. So where in the brain is power consumed, what is it used for, why is it so expensive relative to other costs of living, and how does it achieve its power efficiency relative to engineered silicon? Many classic papers have studied these questions. Attwell and Laughlin (4) developed detailed biophysical estimates suggesting that neural signaling and the postsynaptic effects of neurotransmitter release combined to account for 80% of the brain’s adenosine triphosphate (ATP) consumption, conclusions that are also supported by the overall physiology and anatomy of neural circuits (5, 6). Numerous studies explored the structural and functional consequences of this expenditure for limiting brain size (7) and scaling (8), efficient wiring patterns (9), analog (graded potential) vs. digital (spiking) signaling (10), distributed neural codes (11⇓–13), the distribution of information traffic along nerve tracts and their size distribution (14⇓–16), and computational heterogeneity and efficiency (17). Many of these ideas have been synthesized by Sterling and Laughlin (18) into a set of principles governing the design of brains. Now, in PNAS, Levy and Calvert (19) propose a functional accounting of the power budget of the mammalian brain, suggesting that communication is vastly more expensive than computation, and exploring the functional consequences for neural circuit organization. Levy and Calvert (19) build on the earlier literature by focusing primarily on the relative power committed to different modes of information … [↵][1]1Email: vijay{at}physics.upenn.edu. [1]: #xref-corresp-1-1

Overview

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 · 10.1073/pnas.2107022118

Cites

27 of 27 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Fig. 1. Computation in the brain is distributed among specialized components communicating in networks. Green circles denote a network of cortical areas, each executing different functions. Orange triangles denote a network of pyramidal cells coordinating to compute the function of one cortical area. Levy and Calvert (19) argue that the cost of computation by the elementary units is dwarfed by the cost of communication between them.
Fig. 1. Computation in the brain is distributed among specialized components communicating in networks. Green circles denote a network of cortical areas, each executing different functions. Orange triangles denote a network of pyramidal cells coordinating to compute the function of one cortical area. Levy and Calvert (19) argue that the cost of computation by the elementary units is dwarfed by the cost of communication between them.CC BY-NC-ND · PubMed Central

Verification

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?

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 28 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. L. Sokoloff, “The metabolism of the central nervous system in vivo” in Neurophysiology, J. Field, H. W. Magoun, V. E. Hall, Eds. (Handbook of Physiology, American Physiological Society, 1960), sec. 1, vol. 3, pp. 1843–1864.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 113

Related

Metadata

Authors
Balasubramanian, V.
Affiliations
University of Pennsylvania (US)
Corresponding author
Balasubramanian, Vijay
ORCID
Balasubramanian, Vijay
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Publisher
National Academy of Sciences
Published
2021-08-02
Volume
118
Issue
32
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
DOI
10.1073/pnas.2107022118
PMC
PMC8364152
OpenAlex
W3196841063
Cited by
113
References
28
Citations by year
2026: 28 · 2025: 38 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 3
FWCI
6.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Simons Foundation (400425)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Neural Networks and Applications
Keywords
brain energy consumption, neural communication, neural computation, energy efficiency, ATP consumption, neural circuit organization, mammalian brain
MeSH terms
Brain, Head

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