Rate, timing, and cooperativity jointly determine cortical synaptic plasticity.

By Per Jesper Sjöström, Gina G. Turrigiano, Sacha B. Nelson. Neuron, 2001

1,236 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience, Cognitive Neuroscience, Electrical and Electronic Engineering

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/827e44f9c042d1bba690126eb82ec5b13681522b

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience

In Cognitive Neuroscience

In Electrical and Electronic Engineering

Citations in the corpus

Synaptic consolidation: an approach to long-term learning (2011, background): “However, plasticity does not only depend on pair interactions of spikes (Markram et al. 1997; Sjöström et al. 2001; Froemke et al. 2006; Pfister et al. 2006; Clopath and Gerstner 2010; Clopath et al. 2010).”
Dendritic cortical microcircuits approximate the backpropagation algorithm (2018, background): “Importantly, the plasticity rule depends only on local information available at the synaptic level: postsynaptic firing and dendritic branch voltage, as well as the presynaptic activity, in par with phenomenological models of synaptic plasticity (Sjöström et al., 2001; Clopath et al., 2010; Bono and”
Network-timing-dependent plasticity (2015, background): “Positive cooperativity (flipping LTD into LTP) could be explained by cooperative interactions between weak and strong inputs (Levy and Steward, 1983; Sjöström et al., 2001), multiple input-driven facilitation of the bAP (Sjöström and Häusser, 2006) or by the threshold accumulation of resources…”
Phenomenological models of synaptic plasticity based on spike timing (2008, background): “However, this would seem to result in a bistable distribution of weights which is at odds with the unimodal distribution reported by other studies (Turrigiano et al. 1998; Sjostrom et al. 2001; Song et al. 2005), and with the finding that the magnitude of LTP/LTD increases with the number of spike p”
Dendritic excitability and synaptic plasticity. (2008, positive): “What is the reason for this negative correlation between LTP and initial synaptic weight (69, 421, 535, 717, 878)? To our knowledge, no study has directly addressed this question so far, but it is tempting to speculate that some form of metaplasticity is the key to the answer; synapses that have und”
Astrocytes: Orchestrating synaptic plasticity? (2015, neutral): “! 52! Sjöström,! P.J.,! Turrigiano,! G.G.,! and! Nelson,! S.B.! (2001).! Rate,! timing,! and! cooperativity! jointly! determine! cortical! synaptic! plasticity.! Neuron! 32,! 1149– 1164.! Sjöström,! P.J.,! Turrigiano,! G.G.,! and! Nelson,! S.B.! (2003).! Neocortical! LTD! via! coincident! activation”
Pyramidal Neuron Conductance State Gates Spike-Timing-Dependent Plasticity (2010, background): “One is that t-LTP is more sensitive to postsynaptic depolarization and EPSP amplitude than t-LTD (Sjöström et al., 2001).”
Matching Recall and Storage in Sequence Learning with Spiking Neural Networks (2013, result): “Figure 5”
Models of Metaplasticity: A Review of Concepts (2015, methodology): “By re-examining the weight traces found in the STDP literature (Bi and Poo, 1998; Sjöström et al., 2001; Froemke and Dan, 2002; Froemke et al., 2006) and reproduced in Figure 1C, it can be seen that the weights actually evolve continuously in vitro.”
A History of Spike-Timing-Dependent Plasticity (2011, background): “Synaptic plasticity is also most sensitive to timing within a spiking frequency window (Sjöström et al., 2001), suggesting that the relative spiketiming in connected neurons only mediates bidirectional weight changes in this mid-range of spiking frequencies.”
Functional Requirements for Reward-Modulated Spike-Timing-Dependent Plasticity (2010, background): “Moreover, repeated pre-before-post timing sequences give potentiation, as shown by numerous STDP experiments (Markram et al., 1997; Sjöström et al., 2001).”