The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Statistical Analyses Support Power Law Distributions Found in Neuronal Avalanches
Open accessAbstract
The size distribution of neuronal avalanches in cortical networks has been reported to follow a power law distribution with exponent close to -1.5, which is a reflection of long-range spatial correlations in spontaneous neuronal activity. However, identifying power law scaling in empirical data can be difficult and sometimes controversial. In the present study, we tested the power law hypothesis for neuronal avalanches by using more stringent statistical analyses. In particular, we performed the following steps: (i) analysis of finite-size scaling to identify scale-free dynamics in neuronal avalanches, (ii) model parameter estimation to determine the specific exponent of the power law, and (iii) comparison of the power law to alternative model distributions. Consistent with critical state dynamics, avalanche size distributions exhibited robust scaling behavior in which the maximum avalanche size was limited only by the spatial extent of sampling ("finite size" effect). This scale-free dynamics suggests the power law as a model for the distribution of avalanche sizes. Using both the Kolmogorov-Smirnov statistic and a maximum likelihood approach, we found the slope to be close to -1.5, which is in line with previous reports. Finally, the power law model for neuronal avalanches was compared to the exponential and to various heavy-tail distributions based on the Kolmogorov-Smirnov distance and by using a log-likelihood ratio test. Both the power law distribution without and with exponential cut-off provided significantly better fits to the cluster size distributions in neuronal avalanches than the exponential, the lognormal and the gamma distribution. In summary, our findings strongly support the power law scaling in neuronal avalanches, providing further evidence for critical state dynamics in superficial layers of cortex.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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.
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
Optimal dynamical range of excitable networks at criticality
Kinouchi, O., & Copelli, M. (2006) · Nature Physics · doi:10.1038/nphys289 · Cited by 831
Cited by
Being Critical of Criticality in the Brain
Beggs, J. M., & Timme, N. (2012) · Frontiers in Physiology · doi:10.3389/fphys.2012.00163 · Cited by 494
Self-organized criticality as a fundamental property of neural systems
Hesse, J., & Gross, T. (2014) · Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnsys.2014.00166 · Cited by 440
Power laws and self-organized criticality in theory and nature
Marković, D., & Gros, C. (2014) · Physics Reports · doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2013.11.002 · Cited by 263
Voltage imaging of waking mouse cortex reveals emergence of critical neuronal dynamics
Scott, G., Fagerholm, E. D., Mutoh, H., Leech, R., Sharp, D. J., Shew, W. L., & Knöpfel, T. (2014) · The Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.3474-14.2014 · Cited by 158
Palva, J. M., & Palva, S. (2012) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.02.060 · Cited by 163
Metadata
- Authors
- Klaus, A., Yu, S., & Plenz, D.
- Venue
- PLoS ONE
- Publisher
- Public Library of Science (PLoS)
- Published
- 2011-05-26
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- e19779
- ISSN
- 1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2075625863
- Cited by
- 269
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 8.59
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Statistical Analyses Support Power Law Distributions Found in Neuronal Avalanches. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1371/journal.pone.0019779
- The paper
- Klaus, A., Yu, S., & Plenz, D. (2011). Statistical Analyses Support Power Law Distributions Found in Neuronal Avalanches. PLoS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0019779
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.