A Combinatorial Method for Analyzing Sequential Firing Patterns Involving an Arbitrary Number of Neurons Based on Relative Time Order
Abstract
Information processing in the brain is believed to require coordinated activity across many neurons. With the recent development of techniques for simultaneously recording the spiking activity of large numbers of individual neurons, the search for complex multicell firing patterns that could help reveal this neural code has become possible. Here we develop a new approach for analyzing sequential firing patterns involving an arbitrary number of neurons based on relative firing order. Specifically, we develop a combinatorial method for quantifying the degree of matching between a "reference sequence" of N distinct "letters" (representing a particular target order of firing by N cells) and an arbitrarily long "word" composed of any subset of those letters including repeats (representing the relative time order of spikes in an arbitrary firing pattern). The method involves computing the probability that a random permutation of the word's letters would by chance alone match the reference sequence as well as or better than the actual word does, assuming all permutations were equally likely. Lower probabilities thus indicate better matching. The overall degree and statistical significance of sequence matching across a heterogeneous set of words (such as those produced during the course of an experiment) can be computed from the corresponding set of probabilities. This approach can reduce the sample size problem associated with analyzing complex firing patterns. The approach is gener…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Entire spike trains observed during a task performed during prior waking reemerged in the same temporal order during succeeding sleep, with replay running at a faster speed (time-compressed).
“In fact, entire spike trains observed during a task performed during prior waking reemerged in the same temporal order during succeeding sleep, with this “replay” running at a faster speed, i.e., in a time-compressed form (715, 716, 843).”
From About Sleep's Role in Memory (2013) · cites this paper as [716]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 39 · Cited by 40
- Authors
- Lee, A. K., & Wilson, M. A.
- Affiliations
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)
- Venue
- Journal of Neurophysiology
- Publisher
- American Physiological Society
- Published
- 2004-10
- Volume
- 92
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 2555-2573
- ISSN
- 0022-3077 (ISSN-L)
- 1522-1598
- OpenAlex
- W2115920155
- Cited by
- 40
- References
- 39
- Citations by year
- 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 1.85
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Neurophysiology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
- Keywords
- combinatorial analysis, neural code, spike trains, neuronal synchronization, sample size reduction, hippocampus, slow-wave sleep, memory traces
- MeSH terms
- Algorithms, Animals, Computer Simulation, Data Interpretation, Statistical, Electric Stimulation, Electroencephalography, Electrophysiology, Hippocampus, Neurons, Probability, Sleep, Neural Networks, Computer, Sample Size, Rats
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