From asynchronous states to Griffiths phases and back: structural heterogeneity and homeostasis in excitatory-inhibitory networks (2310.02369v2)
Abstract: Balanced neural networks -- in which excitatory and inhibitory inputs compensate each other on average -- give rise to a dynamical phase dominated by fluctuations called asynchronous state, crucial for brain functioning. However, structural disorder -- which is inherent to random networks -- can hinder such an excitation-inhibition balance. Indeed, structural and synaptic heterogeneities can generate extended regions in phase space akin to critical points, called Griffiths phases, with dynamical features very different from those of asynchronous states. Here, we study a simple neural-network model with tunable levels of heterogeneity able to display these two types of dynamical regimes -- i.e., asynchronous states and Griffiths phases -- putting them together within a single phase diagram. Using this simple model, we are able to emphasize the crucial role played by synaptic plasticity and homeostasis to re-establish balance in intrinsically heterogeneous networks. Overall, we shed light onto how diverse dynamical regimes, each with different functional advantages, can emerge from a given network as a result of self-organizing homeostatic mechanisms.
- G. B. Morales, S. Di Santo, and M. A. Muñoz, Quasiuniversal scaling in mouse-brain neuronal activity stems from edge-of-instability critical dynamics, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 120, e2208998120 (2023a).
- G. B. Morales, S. Di Santo, and M. A. Muñoz, Unveiling the intrinsic dynamics of biological and artificial neural networks: from criticality to optimal representations, arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.10669 (2023b).
- G. Tononi, O. Sporns, and G. M. Edelman, A measure for brain complexity: relating functional segregation and integration in the nervous system., Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 91, 5033 (1994).
- O. Sporns, Network attributes for segregation and integration in the human brain, Current opinion in neurobiology 23, 162 (2013).
- W. R. Softky and C. Koch, The highly irregular firing of cortical cells is inconsistent with temporal integration of random epsps, Journal of neuroscience 13, 334 (1993).
- M. Abeles, Corticonics: Neural circuits of the cerebral cortex (Cambridge University Press, 1991).
- C. Van Vreeswijk and H. Sompolinsky, Chaos in neuronal networks with balanced excitatory and inhibitory activity, Science 274, 1724 (1996).
- C. van Vreeswijk and H. Sompolinsky, Chaotic balanced state in a model of cortical circuits, Neural computation 10, 1321 (1998).
- D. Hansel and H. Sompolinsky, Chaos and synchrony in a model of a hypercolumn in visual cortex, Journal of computational neuroscience 3, 7 (1996).
- N. Brunel, Dynamics of sparsely connected networks of excitatory and inhibitory spiking neurons, Journal of computational neuroscience 8, 183 (2000).
- E. Fino and R. Yuste, Dense inhibitory connectivity in neocortex, Neuron 69, 1188 (2011).
- A. Fornito, A. Zalesky, and E. Bullmore, Fundamentals of brain network analysis (Academic press, 2016).
- J.-n. Teramae, Y. Tsubo, and T. Fukai, Optimal spike-based communication in excitable networks with strong-sparse and weak-dense links, Scientific reports 2, 485 (2012).
- G. Buzsáki and K. Mizuseki, The log-dynamic brain: how skewed distributions affect network operations, Nature Reviews Neuroscience 15, 264 (2014).
- S. Denève and C. K. Machens, Efficient codes and balanced networks, Nature neuroscience 19, 375 (2016).
- J. M. Beggs and D. Plenz, Neuronal avalanches in neocortical circuits, Journal of neuroscience 23, 11167 (2003).
- A. Ponce-Alvarez, M. L. Kringelbach, and G. Deco, Critical scaling of whole-brain resting-state dynamics, Communications Biology 6, 627 (2023).
- D. Plenz and E. Niebur, Criticality in Neural Systems (John Wiley & Sons, New York, 2014).
- M. A. Muñoz, Colloquium: Criticality and dynamical scaling in living systems, Rev. Mod. Phys. 90, 031001 (2018).
- J. O’Byrne and K. Jerbi, How critical is brain criticality?, Trends in Neurosciences (2022).
- J. M. Beggs, The criticality hypothesis: how local cortical networks might optimize information processing, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences 366, 329 (2008).
- W. L. Shew and D. Plenz, The functional benefits of criticality in the cortex, The neuroscientist 19, 88 (2013).
- J. Wilting and V. Priesemann, Between Perfectly Critical and Fully Irregular: A Reverberating Model Captures and Predicts Cortical Spike Propagation, Cerebral Cortex 29, 2759 (2019b).
- J. Li and W. L. Shew, Tuning network dynamics from criticality to an asynchronous state, PLOS Comp. Biol. 16, 1 (2020).
- O. Sporns, R. Kötter, and K. J. Friston, Motifs in brain networks, PLoS biology 2, e369 (2004b).
- O. Sporns, G. Tononi, and R. Kötter, The human connectome: a structural description of the human brain, PLoS computational biology 1, e42 (2005).
- V. Balasubramanian, Heterogeneity and efficiency in the brain, Proceedings of the IEEE 103, 1346 (2015).
- J. F. Mejias and A. Longtin, Differential effects of excitatory and inhibitory heterogeneity on the gain and asynchronous state of sparse cortical networks, Frontiers in computational neuroscience 8, 107 (2014).
- L. Chen, C. Yu, and J. Zhai, How network structure affects the dynamics of a network of stochastic spiking neurons, Chaos: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlinear Science 33, 093101 (2023).
- T. Vojta, Rare region effects at classical, quantum and nonequilibrium phase transitions, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General 39, R143 (2006).
- A. G. Moreira and R. Dickman, Critical dynamics of the contact process with quenched disorder, Physical Review E 54, R3090 (1996).
- R. Cafiero, A. Gabrielli, and M. A. Muñoz, Disordered one-dimensional contact process, Physical Review E 57, 5060 (1998).
- P. Moretti and M. A. Muñoz, Griffiths phases and the stretching of criticality in brain networks, Nature communications 4, 1 (2013).
- G. Ódor, Robustness of griffiths effects in homeostatic connectome models, Physical Review E 99, 012113 (2019).
- G. Ódor, Critical dynamics on a large human open connectome network, Phys. Rev. E 94, 062411 (2016).
- The ISI is measured here as the number of timesteps between deactivation and consecutive activation of a given cell.
- O. Kinouchi and M. Copelli, Optimal dynamical range of excitable networks at criticality, Nature physics 2, 348 (2006).
- G. G. Turrigiano, The self-tuning neuron: synaptic scaling of excitatory synapses, Cell 135, 422 (2008).
- M. A. Gainey and D. E. Feldman, Multiple shared mechanisms for homeostatic plasticity in rodent somatosensory and visual cortex, Phil. Trans. of the Royal Society B: Biol. Sci. 372, 20160157 (2017).
- J. Zierenberg, J. Wilting, and V. Priesemann, Homeostatic plasticity and external input shape neural network dynamics, Physical Review X 8, 031018 (2018).
- J. F. Mejías and X.-J. Wang, Mechanisms of distributed working memory in a large-scale network of macaque neocortex, Elife 11, e72136 (2022).
- J. Liang, T. Zhou, and C. Zhou, Hopf bifurcation in mean field explains critical avalanches in excitation-inhibition balanced neuronal networks: a mechanism for multiscale variability, Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience 14, 580011 (2020).