arxiv: 2605.02365 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-04 · 🧮 math.DS · q-bio.NC

Recognition: 4 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

Modeling sequential cognitive states via population level cortical dynamics

Dario Prandi (CNRS, L2S), Luca Greco (L2S), M Virginia Bolelli (L2S)

Pith reviewed 2026-05-08 18:29 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🧮 math.DS q-bio.NC

keywords heteroclinic cyclesneural-field modelscognitive state transitionsuniversal approximation theoremfocused-attention meditationpopulation dynamicssequential patternsAmari-type systems

0 comments

The pith

Neural networks approximating dynamics with heteroclinic cycles produce periodic trajectories that closely follow those cycles in an interpretable high-dimensional neural-field model.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper aims to model cyclic and sequential patterns of brain activity by combining heteroclinic dynamics with discrete neural-field models. It shows that spatial-discrete neural-field equations with biologically realistic equilibria cannot support heteroclinic cycles, whereas Lotka-Volterra systems can but lack direct neuronal correspondence. Using the Universal Approximation Theorem, any target dynamics containing a heteroclinic cycle is approximated by a neural network viewed as a high-dimensional Amari-type neural-field system, yielding a periodic trajectory that tracks the heteroclinic connection. This framework is applied to focused-attention meditation to reproduce transitions among cognitive states at the population level.

Core claim

We first show that spatial-discrete neural-field equations with biologically realistic equilibria cannot support heteroclinic cycles. Heteroclinic dynamics often arise in Lotka-Volterra-type systems, but these do not directly correspond to neuronal processes. We use a version of the Universal Approximation Theorem to approximate any target dynamics by a neural network interpretable as a high-dimensional Amari-type neural-field system. When the target dynamics contains a heteroclinic cycle, the approximating vector field generates a periodic trajectory that closely follows the heteroclinic connection. As a case study, we consider the cognitive processes underlying focused-attention meditation

What carries the argument

The neural-network approximant obtained via the Universal Approximation Theorem, interpreted as a high-dimensional Amari-type neural-field system whose equilibria and connections retain population-level meaning.

If this is right

Sequential transitions among cognitive states arise as periodic trajectories in the approximating neural-field dynamics.
The model reproduces the cognitive processes underlying focused-attention meditation through population-level cortical dynamics.
Any target dynamics containing a heteroclinic cycle admits an approximating vector field that tracks the cycle periodically.
Equilibria and connections in the neural-field system retain biological interpretability at the population level.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

The technique could extend to modeling other sequential cognitive processes such as decision sequences or memory chains.
Empirical checks against brain imaging data during meditation tasks would test how well the periodic trajectories match observed activity.
High-dimensional neural fields may embed low-dimensional heteroclinic structures to support a wide range of sequential brain patterns.

Load-bearing premise

The neural-network approximant obtained via the Universal Approximation Theorem can be interpreted as a biologically plausible high-dimensional Amari-type neural-field system whose equilibria and connections retain meaning at the population level.

What would settle it

A concrete numerical simulation of the approximating neural network for a known target system containing a heteroclinic cycle, verifying whether it generates a periodic trajectory that closely follows the connection.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.02365 by Dario Prandi (CNRS, L2S), Luca Greco (L2S), M Virginia Bolelli (L2S).

**Figure 1.1.** Figure 1.1: (a) Schematic representation of the cognitive phases involved in FAM: sustained view at source ↗

**Figure 2.1.** Figure 2.1: Sequential dynamics within a heteroclinic cycle, Γ, composed of saddle equilibria view at source ↗

**Figure 2.2.** Figure 2.2: Example of heteroclinic dynamics in R n for n = Q = 3. A noteworthy property of dynamics characterized by the presence of heteroclinic cycles is that the residence time1 near each saddle increases without bound as a trajectory repeatedly approaches the cycle. Small perturbations, whether deterministic or stochastic, prevent this divergence, producing sustained oscillatory dynamics. In such perturbed syst… view at source ↗

**Figure 2.3.** Figure 2.3: Two examples of nonlinearities σ considered in this paper. a heteroclinic cycle connecting n equilibria x¯1, . . . , x¯n ∈ R n . Since each equilibrium ¯xi represents the activation of a single population while all others remain inactive, we assume that each equilibrium lies along one of the coordinate axes and can be written as (3.1) ¯xi = aiei for suitable constants ai > 0, where ei denotes the i-th ca… view at source ↗

**Figure 4.1.** Figure 4.1: Schematic of neural interpretability. The image illustrates how the network view at source ↗

**Figure 4.2.** Figure 4.2: (a) Visualization of the set Br(Zg) appearing in Proposition 4.9. (b) Illustration of the neighborhood N := {x ∈ K : dist(x, Γ) < r} around the heteroclinic cycle Γ. (c) Display of the transversal section Σ used to construct first return maps Φ. continuity of x 7→ fθ(x), for each ˜xi there exists δi > 0 such that fθ(x) ̸= 0 for all x ∈ Bδi (˜xi). Setting δ = mini δi , choosing r = δ/2, we obtain fθ(x) ̸=… view at source ↗

**Figure 5.1.** Figure 5.1: Trajectories of the system described by ( view at source ↗

**Figure 5.2.** Figure 5.2: Comparison between the target dynamics ˙x view at source ↗

**Figure 5.3.** Figure 5.3: Neural interpretation of the learned dynamics. Top row: symmetric case view at source ↗

read the original abstract

In this work, we present a mathematical model for cyclic and sequential patterns of brain activity, combining heteroclinic dynamics with discrete neural-field models. We first show that spatial-discrete neural-field equations with biologically realistic equilibria cannot support heteroclinic cycles. On the other hand, heterocline dynamics often arise in Lotka-Volterra-type systems, but these equations do not directly correspond to neuronal processes. To address this, we use a version of the Universal Approximation Theorem to approximate any target dynamics by a neural network interpretable as a high-dimensional Amari-type neural-field system. When the target dynamics contains a heteroclinic cycle, the approximating vector field generates a periodic trajectory that closely follows the heteroclinic connection. As a case study, we consider the cognitive processes underlying focused-attention meditation. We show how the model reproduces sequential transitions among cognitive states and we conclude providing a neural interpretation of the approximating dynamics.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

The paper rules out heteroclinic cycles in discrete neural fields with realistic equilibria and gives a UAT construction to approximate them inside high-dimensional Amari fields, with a meditation case study, but the periodic shadowing claim needs quantitative error control on long-time behavior near saddles.

read the letter

The two main things here are a negative result ruling out heteroclinic cycles in discrete neural fields with realistic equilibria, and a construction that uses the universal approximation theorem to embed such cycles into a high-dimensional Amari-type neural field. The meditation example then shows how this can model sequential cognitive state transitions. The negative result is solid and worth having on record. It cleanly separates what standard neural-field setups can do from what they can't. The UAT step is a practical way to get any target vector field approximated by something that looks like a neural field, and the case study gives a concrete application to focused-attention meditation. The weaker part is the claim that the approximating field produces a periodic trajectory that closely follows the heteroclinic connection. The universal approximation theorem controls the vector field on compact sets, but heteroclinic orbits take infinite time and slow down near the equilibria. Without explicit bounds on how approximation errors affect passage times or without a shadowing argument, it's not clear that the periodic orbit stays close in the way described. The paper doesn't appear to supply quantitative error estimates or stability checks for the global structure. This work is for mathematical neuroscientists who model cognitive sequences with population-level dynamics. Someone looking for ways to link heteroclinic ideas to neural fields will get something useful from the construction and the example. It should go to peer review. The ideas are developed enough that referees can check the negative result and push on the approximation details.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript claims that spatially discrete neural-field equations with biologically realistic equilibria cannot support heteroclinic cycles, while Lotka-Volterra systems can but lack direct neuronal interpretation. It invokes a version of the Universal Approximation Theorem to show that any target vector field (including those with heteroclinic cycles) can be approximated by a high-dimensional Amari-type neural-field system realized as a neural network. When the target contains a heteroclinic cycle, the approximating system is asserted to generate a periodic trajectory that closely follows the heteroclinic connections. This framework is applied as a case study to model sequential transitions among cognitive states during focused-attention meditation, with a neural interpretation of the resulting dynamics.

Significance. If the central approximation result can be made rigorous with explicit error control, the work would provide a useful bridge between abstract dynamical-systems models of sequential cognition and population-level cortical dynamics interpretable as neural fields. The negative result on discrete neural fields and the explicit neural-network realization are constructive elements that could aid model-building in cognitive neuroscience, though the absence of quantitative bounds on long-time behavior limits immediate applicability.

major comments (2)

[Abstract / main approximation theorem] Abstract and the statement of the main approximation result: the claim that the approximating vector field 'generates a periodic trajectory that closely follows the heteroclinic connection' is not supported by quantitative error bounds, stability analysis under perturbation, or invocation of shadowing/persistence results. UAT guarantees uniform approximation on compact sets, but heteroclinic orbits spend arbitrarily long times near equilibria; residual errors can alter passage times or destroy the connection structure, and no such control is provided.
[Case study / meditation application] Case-study section on focused-attention meditation: the manuscript asserts that the model reproduces sequential transitions among cognitive states but provides no verification that the periodic orbit of the approximant preserves the original heteroclinic timing or connection structure; without this, the neural interpretation of the approximating dynamics rests on an unverified shadowing property.

minor comments (2)

[Model formulation] The precise statement of the neural-field equations (Amari-type) and the embedding of the neural-network weights into the population-level parameters could be clarified with an explicit mapping between the UAT approximant and the biological parameters.
[Interpretation section] A brief discussion of how the equilibria of the approximant relate to the original saddle points would improve readability and strengthen the biological plausibility argument.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and constructive feedback on our manuscript. The concerns about the lack of quantitative control on the approximation for heteroclinic dynamics and the verification in the case study are well-taken. We will revise the manuscript to temper the claims, add explicit caveats, and clarify the scope of the results. Point-by-point responses follow.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Abstract / main approximation theorem] Abstract and the statement of the main approximation result: the claim that the approximating vector field 'generates a periodic trajectory that closely follows the heteroclinic connection' is not supported by quantitative error bounds, stability analysis under perturbation, or invocation of shadowing/persistence results. UAT guarantees uniform approximation on compact sets, but heteroclinic orbits spend arbitrarily long times near equilibria; residual errors can alter passage times or destroy the connection structure, and no such control is provided.

Authors: We agree that the Universal Approximation Theorem provides only uniform approximation on compact sets and does not by itself control long-time behavior along heteroclinic orbits, where trajectories linger near equilibria. The original phrasing in the abstract and theorem statement overstated the closeness of the resulting periodic orbit without supporting analysis. In the revision we will replace the claim with a more precise statement that the approximant reproduces the target vector field to arbitrary accuracy on compact subsets of phase space (away from equilibria) and that numerical evidence suggests qualitatively similar sequential transitions; we will add a dedicated paragraph discussing the absence of shadowing or persistence guarantees and the potential for residual errors to affect passage times. This change will be incorporated in the next version. revision: yes
Referee: [Case study / meditation application] Case-study section on focused-attention meditation: the manuscript asserts that the model reproduces sequential transitions among cognitive states but provides no verification that the periodic orbit of the approximant preserves the original heteroclinic timing or connection structure; without this, the neural interpretation of the approximating dynamics rests on an unverified shadowing property.

Authors: The case study is intended as an illustrative example rather than a quantitatively validated reproduction. We acknowledge that no explicit check of timing preservation or connection structure is supplied, so the neural interpretation rests on the vector-field approximation alone. In the revised manuscript we will insert a clarifying paragraph stating that the reproduction is qualitative, note the lack of rigorous shadowing results as a limitation, and indicate that future numerical studies could compare passage times between the target and approximant. This addresses the referee's point directly. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation relies on external UAT without self-referential reduction

full rationale

The paper's core step invokes the standard Universal Approximation Theorem to construct a neural-network approximant interpretable as a high-dimensional Amari neural field from an arbitrary target vector field (including one with a heteroclinic cycle). This is not a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction, nor a self-definition, nor dependent on a load-bearing self-citation. The subsequent claim that the approximant generates a periodic trajectory shadowing the heteroclinic connection is a separate mathematical assertion about the approximation's global behavior; it does not reduce by construction to the input target dynamics or to any internal fitting. No equations or steps in the provided abstract and description exhibit the enumerated circularity patterns. The derivation remains self-contained against external benchmarks such as the UAT.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the Universal Approximation Theorem (standard) and the assumption that the resulting network can be read as an Amari neural-field model; no new free parameters or invented entities are introduced in the abstract.

axioms (1)

standard math Universal Approximation Theorem for neural networks
Invoked to guarantee existence of a neural network whose vector field approximates any target dynamics, including those containing heteroclinic cycles.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5465 in / 1317 out tokens · 21187 ms · 2026-05-08T18:29:48.925882+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

IndisputableMonolith/Cost (Jcost = ½(x+x⁻¹)−1) washburn_uniqueness_aczel unclear
˙x = −x + σ(Wx + b) ... σ ∈ C¹(R,R), σ(0)=0, σ′(0)=1, σ(R)⊂(−1,1)
IndisputableMonolith/Foundation/AlexanderDuality alexander_duality_circle_linking unclear
Three-dimensional state space (CN, DMN, SN) chosen by neuroscience of FAM, not derived
Foundation period/8-tick modules (no parameter-free period claim) unclear
Period of the resulting limit cycle estimated as a sum of residence times ti ∼ 1/λ_u^i set by chosen Lotka-Volterra eigenvalues
IndisputableMonolith/Foundation/LogicAsFunctionalEquation derivedCost / Translation Theorem unclear
Universal Approximation Theorem used to approximate an arbitrary smooth vector field by −x + Pσ(Wx+b)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

46 extracted references · 11 canonical work pages

[1]

V. S. Afraimovich, M. I. Rabinovich, and P. Varona , Heteroclinic contours in neural ensembles and the winnerless competition principle , International Journal of Bifurcation and Chaos, 14 (2004), pp. 1195–1208

2004
[2]

V. S. Afraimovich, V. Zhigulin, and M. I. Rabinovich, On the origin of reproducible sequential activ- ity in neural circuits , Chaos: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlinear Science, 14 (2004), pp. 1123– 1129

2004
[3]

T. H. Alderson, A. L. Bokde, J. S. Kelso, L. Maguire, and D. Coyle, Metastable neural dynamics underlies cognitive performance across multiple behavioural paradigms , Human brain mapping, 41 (2020), pp. 3212–3234

2020
[4]

S. I. Amari , Characteristics of random nets of analog neuron-like elements , IEEE Transactions on Sys- tems, Man, and Cybernetics, 2 (1972), pp. 643–657, https://doi.org/10.1109/TSMC.1972.4309193

work page doi:10.1109/tsmc.1972.4309193 1972
[5]

Ashwin and C

P. Ashwin and C. Postlethwaite , On designing heteroclinic networks from graphs , Physica D: Non- linear Phenomena, 265 (2013), pp. 26–39

2013
[6]

M. V. Bolelli, G. Citti, A. Sarti, and S. W. Zucker , Individuation of 3d perceptual units from neurogeometry of binocular cells, SIAM Journal on Imaging Sciences, 18 (2025), pp. 2605–2640

2025
[7]

M. V. Bolelli and D. Prandi , Neural field equations with time-periodic external inputs and some applications to visual processing, Journal of Mathematical Imaging and Vision, 67 (2025), p. 47

2025
[8]

P. C. Bressloff, J. D. Cowan, M. Golubitsky, P. J. Thomas, and M. C. Wiener, Geometric visual hallucinations, Euclidean symmetry and the functional architecture of striate cortex , Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 356 (2001), pp. 299–330, https://doi.org/ 10.1098/rstb.2000.0769

work page doi:10.1098/rstb.2000.0769 2001
[9]

Capouskova, M

K. Capouskova, M. L. Kringelbach, and G. Deco , Modes of cognition: Evidence from metastable brain dynamics, Neuroimage, 260 (2022), p. 119489

2022
[10]

S. B. Castro and A. M. Rucklidge , Robust heteroclinic cycles in pluridimensions: S. castro et al. , Journal of Nonlinear Science, 35 (2025), p. 80. 28 M. V. BOLELLI, L. GRECO, D. PRANDI

2025
[11]

Coombes, P

S. Coombes, P. Beim Graben, R. Potthast, and J. Wright , eds., Neural Fields: Theory and Applications , Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1007/ 978-3-642-54593-1

2014
[12]

J. P. Cunningham and B. M. Yu , Dimensionality reduction for large-scale neural recordings , Nature Neuroscience, 17 (2014), pp. 1500–1509, https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.3776

work page doi:10.1038/nn.3776 2014
[13]

Cybenko, Approximation by superpositions of a sigmoidal function , Mathematics of control, signals and systems, 2 (1989), pp

G. Cybenko, Approximation by superpositions of a sigmoidal function , Mathematics of control, signals and systems, 2 (1989), pp. 303–314

1989
[14]

G. B. Ermentrout and J. D. Cowan, A mathematical theory of visual hallucination patterns. , Biolog- ical cybernetics, 34 (1979), pp. 137–150, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00336965

work page doi:10.1007/bf00336965 1979
[15]

Ganesan, E

S. Ganesan, E. Beyer, B. Moffat, N. T. Van Dam, V. Lorenzetti, and A. Zalesky, Focused atten- tion meditation in healthy adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis of cross-sectional functional mri studies, Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 141 (2022), p. 104846

2022
[16]

W. Hasenkamp, Using first-person reports during meditation to investigate basic cognitive experience , in Meditation–Neuroscientific Approaches and Philosophical Implications, Springer, 2013, pp. 75–93

2013
[17]

Hasenkamp and L

W. Hasenkamp and L. W. Barsalou , Effects of meditation experience on functional connectivity of distributed brain networks, Frontiers in human neuroscience, 6 (2012), p. 38

2012
[18]

Hasenkamp, C

W. Hasenkamp, C. D. Wilson-Mendenhall, E. Duncan, and L. W. Barsalou , Mind wandering and attention during focused meditation: a fine-grained temporal analysis of fluctuating cognitive states, Neuroimage, 59 (2012), pp. 750–760

2012
[19]

A. D. Horchler, K. A. Daltorio, H. J. Chiel, and R. D. Quinn , Designing responsive pattern generators: stable heteroclinic channel cycles for modeling and control , Bioinspiration & biomimetics, 10 (2015), p. 026001

2015
[20]

Hornik, M

K. Hornik, M. Stinchcombe, and H. White , Universal approximation of an unknown mapping and its derivatives using multilayer feedforward networks , Neural networks, 3 (1990), pp. 551–560

1990
[21]

Huerta and M

R. Huerta and M. Rabinovich, Reproducible sequence generation in random neural ensembles, Physical review letters, 93 (2004), p. 238104

2004
[22]

Jeong and C

V. Jeong and C. Postlethwaite, Effect of noise on residence times of a heteroclinic cycle , Dynamical Systems, 38 (2023), pp. 79–101

2023
[23]

Krupa, Robust heteroclinic cycles, Journal of Nonlinear Science, 7 (1997), pp

M. Krupa, Robust heteroclinic cycles, Journal of Nonlinear Science, 7 (1997), pp. 129–176

1997
[24]

Krupa and I

M. Krupa and I. Melbourne , Asymptotic stability of heteroclinic cycles in systems with symmetry , Ergodic Theory and Dynamical Systems, 15 (1995), pp. 121–147

1995
[25]

Laurent, M

G. Laurent, M. Stopfer, R. W. Friedrich, M. I. Rabinovich, A. Volkovskii, and H. D. Abar- banel, Odor encoding as an active, dynamical process: experiments, computation, and theory, Annual review of neuroscience, 24 (2001), pp. 263–297

2001
[26]

J. M. Lee and J. M. Lee , Smooth manifolds, Springer, 2003

2003
[27]

Maier and D

A. Maier and D. A. Leopold , Binocular rivalry , in Encyclopedia of Neuroscience, M. D. Binder, N. Hirokawa, and U. Windhorst, eds., Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2009, pp. 391– 394, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-29678-2 631

work page doi:10.1007/978-3-540-29678-2 2009
[28]

Nechyporenko, P

K. Nechyporenko, P. Ashwin, and K. Tsaneva-Atanasova, Switching states: Heteroclinic cycles as organising centres of neuronal dynamics , arXiv preprint arXiv:2507.15519, (2025)

work page arXiv 2025
[29]

Nicolas, B

J. Nicolas, B. R. King, D. L ´evesque, L. Lazzouni, G. Leroux, D. Wang, N. Grossman, S. P. Swinnen, J. Doyon, J. Carrier, et al. , Unraveling the neurophysiological correlates of phase- specific enhancement of motor memory consolidation via slow-wave closed-loop targeted memory re- activation, Nature Communications, 16 (2025), p. 2644

2025
[30]

arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.18384 , year=

P. Petersen and J. Zech , Mathematical theory of deep learning , arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.18384, (2024)

work page arXiv 2024
[31]

Pinkus, Approximation theory of the mlp model in neural networks , Acta numerica, 8 (1999), pp

A. Pinkus, Approximation theory of the mlp model in neural networks , Acta numerica, 8 (1999), pp. 143– 195

1999
[32]

Rabinovich, A

M. Rabinovich, A. Volkovskii, P. Lecanda, R. Huerta, H. D. Abarbanel, and G. Laurent , Dynamical encoding by networks of competing neuron groups: winnerless competition, Physical review letters, 87 (2001), p. 068102

2001
[33]

M. I. Rabinovich, V. S. Afraimovich, C. Bick, and P. Varona , Information flow dynamics in the brain, Physics of Life Reviews, 9 (2012), pp. 51–73, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plrev.2011.11.002

work page doi:10.1016/j.plrev.2011.11.002 2012
[34]

M. I. Rabinovich, R. Huerta, P. Varona, and V. S. Afraimovich , Transient cognitive dynamics, SEQUENTIAL STATES VIA NEURAL DYNAMICS 29 metastability, and decision making , PLoS computational biology, 4 (2008), p. e1000072

2008
[35]

M. I. Rabinovich, P. Varona, A. I. Selverston, and H. D. Abarbanel , Dynamical principles in neuroscience, Reviews of modern physics, 78 (2006), pp. 1213–1265

2006
[36]

Ricard, A

M. Ricard, A. Lutz, and R. J. Davidson , Mind of the meditator , Scientific American, 311 (2014), pp. 38–45

2014
[37]

Schwappach, A

C. Schwappach, A. Hutt, and P. Beim Graben , Metastable dynamics in heterogeneous neural fields , Frontiers in systems neuroscience, 9 (2015), p. 97

2015
[38]

H. L. Smith , Monotone Dynamical Systems: An Introduction to the Theory of Competitive and Coop- erative Systems, vol. 41 of Mathematical Surveys and Monographs, American Mathematical Society, 1995

1995
[39]

Stone and P

E. Stone and P. Holmes , Random perturbations of heteroclinic attractors , SIAM Journal on Applied Mathematics, 50 (1990), pp. 726–743

1990
[40]

Stringer, M

C. Stringer, M. Pachitariu, N. Steinmetz, M. Carandini, and K. D. Harris , High-dimensional geometry of population responses in visual cortex , Nature, 571 (2019), pp. 361–365, https://doi.org/ 10.1038/s41586-019-1346-5

work page doi:10.1038/s41586-019-1346-5 2019
[41]

Tamekue, D

C. Tamekue, D. Prandi, and Y. Chitour , A Mathematical Model of the Visual MacKay Effect , SIAM Journal on Applied Dynamical Systems, 23 (2024), pp. 2138–2178, https://doi.org/10.1137/ 23M1616686

2024
[42]

Tamekue, D

C. Tamekue, D. Prandi, and Y. Chitour , Reproducibility via neural fields of visual illusions induced by localized stimuli , Discrete and Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 30 (2025), pp. 1441–1471, https://doi.org/10.3934/dcdsb.2024135

work page doi:10.3934/dcdsb.2024135 2025
[43]

M. W. van Es, C. Higgins, C. Gohil, A. J. Quinn, D. Vidaurre, and M. W. Woolrich , Large- scale cortical functional networks are organized in structured cycles , Nature Neuroscience, 28 (2025), pp. 2118–2128

2025
[44]

H. R. Wilson and J. D. Cowan, Excitatory and inhibitory interactions in localized populations of model neurons, Biophysical journal, 12 (1972), pp. 1–24

1972
[45]

H. R. Wilson and J. D. Cowan, Excitatory and inhibitory interactions in localized populations of model neurons, Biophysical Journal, 12 (1972), pp. 1–24, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0006-3495(72)86068-5

work page doi:10.1016/s0006-3495(72)86068-5 1972
[46]

H. R. Wilson and J. D. Cowan , A mathematical theory of the functional dynamics of cortical and thalamic nervous tissue , Kybernetik, 13 (1973), pp. 55–80

1973