Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Axonal processes and neural plasticity: a reply

T Elliott1, C I Howarth, N R Shadbolt

  • 1Department of Psychology, University of Nottingham, U.K.

Neural Computation
|April 4, 1998
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Survival and temporal change in the viability of <i>Ascaridia galli</i> eggs exposed to refrigeration or freezing temperatures in the presence of a cryoprotectant.

Journal of helminthology·2025
Same author

Translation of Prognostic and Pharmacodynamic Biomarkers from Trial to Non-trial Patients with Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer Treated with Docetaxel.

Clinical oncology (Royal College of Radiologists (Great Britain))·2022
Same author

Viability and development of <i>Ascaridia galli</i> eggs recovered in artificial media followed by storage under different conditions.

Journal of helminthology·2020
Same author

Glycerin suppositories used prophylactically in premature infants (supp): A pilot randomized controlled trial.

Journal of neonatal-perinatal medicine·2020
Same author

Utility of Prognostic Markers in Second-line Treatment of Metastatic Urothelial Cancer.

Clinical oncology (Royal College of Radiologists (Great Britain))·2017
Same author

A national survey of current practices of preparation and management of radical prostate radiotherapy patients during treatment.

Radiography (London, England : 1995)·2017
Same journal

A Model-Free Reinforcement Learning Implementation of Decision Making Under Uncertainty by Sequential Sampling.

Neural computation·2026
Same journal

DROP: Distributional and Regular Optimism and Pessimism for Reinforcement Learning.

Neural computation·2026
Same journal

Hierarchical Active Inference Using Successor Representations.

Neural computation·2026
Same journal

W-Kernel and Its Principal Space for Frequentist Evaluation of Bayesian Estimators.

Neural computation·2026
Same journal

A Hidden Markov Model-Inspired Sequence Classification Method for Hyperdimensional Computing.

Neural computation·2026
Same journal

Sparse Graphical Modeling for Electrophysiological Phase-Based Connectivity Using Circular Statistics.

Neural computation·2026
See all related articles

We found a narrow mathematical equivalence between sprouting-and-retraction and fixed-anatomy models, but they are not dynamically the same. Significant differences exist, challenging claims of complete model equivalence.

Area of Science:

  • Computational Biology
  • Mathematical Modeling

Background:

  • Sprouting-and-retraction models and fixed-anatomy models are used to simulate biological processes.
  • A claim of mathematical equivalence between these two classes of models has been proposed.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To critically evaluate the claim that sprouting-and-retraction models are mathematically equivalent to fixed-anatomy models.
  • To investigate the implications of any mathematical equivalence for the dynamical behavior of the models.

Main Methods:

  • Comparative analysis of energy functions in both model classes.
  • Examination of the dynamical differences arising from distinct modeling approaches.

Main Results:

  • A narrow mathematical equivalence was identified specifically for the energy functions.

Related Experiment Videos

  • This equivalence of energy functions does not extend to the overall models.
  • Significant dynamical differences between the two modeling approaches were highlighted.

    • Conclusions:

    • The claim of complete mathematical equivalence between sprouting-and-retraction and fixed-anatomy models is not supported.
    • Dynamical behaviors differ substantially, despite superficial energy function similarities.
    • The study clarifies the limitations of equating different modeling frameworks.