Skip to main content

Limits to the scalability of cortical network models

The size of the mammalian brain is inconveniently right in the middle between a few interacting particles and a mole of matter on a logarithmic scale. In physics, we learn that often in the limit where system size goes to infinity, simple mathematical expressions can be obtained uncovering the mechanisms governing the dynamics at the large but finite system size in nature. In neuroscience, however, we found that such an ansatz may fail because correlations drop so slowly that the mechanism governing the behavior in the infinite size limit [1] is not the mechanism relevant at the scale of the brain circuit in question [2]. The direct simulation of networks at their natural size has historically been difficult due to the sheer number of neurons and synapses. Therefore, neuroscientists also routinely explore the other side of the logarithmic scale and investigate downscaled circuits. In summary, it seems that brain networks are often too small for the infinity limit and too large for simulations.

In this contribution, we assess the scalability of networks in the asynchronous irregular state with a focus on downscaling. By extending the theory of correlations in such networks [25] and verifying analytical predictions by direct simulations using NEST [6], we formally demonstrate that generally already second-order measures cannot be preserved. The underlying mathematical reason is a one-to-one mapping between correlation structure and effective connectivity, which depends both on the physical connectivity and on the working point of the neurons [7]. Correlations are relevant because they influence synaptic plasticity [8] and large-scale measurements of neuronal activity [9], and are related to information processing and behavior [10, 11].

Our results show that the reducibility of asynchronous networks is fundamentally limited, indicating the importance of considering networks with realistic numbers of neurons and synapses. Fortunately, corresponding simulation technology is becoming available to neuroscience [12]. Both the investigation of the infinity limit and the exploration of downscaled networks remain powerful methods of computational neuroscience. However, researchers should make explicit the rationale they apply in up- or downscaling.


  1. Renart A, de la Rocha J, Bartho P, Hollender L, Parga N, Reyes A, Harris KD: The asynchronous state in cortical circuits. Science. 2010, 327 (5965): 587-590.

    PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Helias M, Tetzlaff T, Diesmann M: The correlation structure of local cortical networks intrinsically results from recurrent dynamics. PLoS Comput Biol. 2014, 10 (1): e1003428-

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Ginzburg I, Sompolinsky H: Theory of correlations in stochastic neural networks. Phys Rev E. 1994, 50 (4): 3171-3191.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Grytskyy D, Tetzlaff T, Diesmann M, Helias M: A unified view on weakly correlated recurrent networks. Front Comput Neurosci. 2013, 7: 131-

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Helias M, Tetzlaff T, Diesmann M: Echoes in correlated neural systems. New J Phys. 2013, 15: 023002-

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Gewaltig MO, Diesmann M: NEST (NEural Simulation Tool). Scholarpedia. 2007, 2: 1430-

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. van Albada SJ, Helias M, Diesmann M: Scalability of asynchronous networks is limited by one-to-one mapping between effective connectivity and correlations. arXiv preprint. 2014, 1411: 4770-

    Google Scholar 

  8. Morrison A, Aertsen A, Diesmann M: Spike-timing dependent plasticity in balanced random networks. Neural Comput. 2007, 19 (6): 1437-1467.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Lindén H, Tetzlaff T, Potjans TC, Pettersen KH, Grün S, et al: Modeling the spatial reach of the LFP. Neuron. 2011, 72 (5): 859-872.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Zohary E, Shadlen MN, Newsome WT: Correlated neuronal discharge rate and its implications for psychophysical performance. Nature. 1994, 370 (6485): 140-143.

    PubMed  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Riehle A, Grün S, Diesmann M, Aertsen A: Spike synchronization and rate modulation differentially involved in motor cortical function. Science. 1997, 278 (5345): 1950-1953.

    PubMed  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Kunkel S, Schmidt M, Eppler JM, Plesser HE, Masumoto G, et al: Spiking network simulation code for petascale computers. Front Neuroinform. 2014, 8: 78-

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references


We acknowledge funding by the Helmholtz Association: portfolio theme SMHB and Young Investigator's Group VH-NG-1028, and EU Grants 269921 (BrainScaleS) and 604102 (Human Brain Project).

Author information



Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sacha J van Albada.

Rights and permissions

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

van Albada, S.J., Helias, M. & Diesmann, M. Limits to the scalability of cortical network models. BMC Neurosci 16, O1 (2015).

Download citation

  • Published:

  • DOI:


  • System Size
  • Brain Network
  • Mathematical Reason
  • Direct Simulation
  • Cortical Network