Computational modeling methodology for chronic stress as excitatory-inhibitory (E/I) balance perturbation in recurrent working-memory networks. Use when modeling stress effects on prefrontal cortex, studying resilience mechanisms, or analyzing E/I balance disruptions in neuropsychiatric conditions.
Installer avec Codex ou Claude Copiez ce prompt, collez-le dans Codex, Claude ou un autre assistant, puis laissez-le vérifier la page du skill et l'installer pour vous.
Une commande directe contourne le prompt de vérification. Examinez la source avant de l'exécuter.
Computational modeling methodology for chronic stress as excitatory-inhibitory (E/I) balance perturbation in recurrent working-memory networks. Use when modeling stress effects on prefrontal cortex, studying resilience mechanisms, or analyzing E/I balance disruptions in neuropsychiatric conditions.
Key Finding:
Only S↑[W_{I→E}] (stronger I→E synapses) reproduces all three signatures simultaneously, suggesting a causal cascade where enhanced inhibition leads to excitatory hypofunction as downstream consequence.
3. Resilience Analysis
Training Protocol:
Naive networks: trained without stress operator
Resilient networks: trained with stress operator applied
Compare performance, connectivity, dynamics, energy
Resilience Trade-offs:
✓ Preserves task performance under stress
✓ Confines network to same dynamical subspace with/without stress
✓ Maintains energetic regime
✗ Reduced generalization to longer delays (out-of-distribution)
✗ Decreased network density and reciprocity
✗ Shift toward directional (non-symmetric) information flow
Interpretation:
Resilience = specialized solution tuned to training regime → computational analogue of behavioral rigidity/habit formation observed in chronic stress animal models.
4. Analysis Metrics
E/I Balance Quantification:
# Excitatory drive (recurrent input to E population)
h_E(t) = W_{EE} r_E(t) + W_{EI} r_I(t)
# Inhibitory drive (recurrent input to I population)
h_I(t) = W_{IE} r_E(t) + W_{II} r_I(t)
# E/I balance ratio
EI_ratio = mean(h_E) / mean(h_I)
# Inhibitory dominance: EI_ratio < 1
Network Topology:
Density: fraction of non-zero connections
Reciprocity: symmetry of bidirectional connections (W_{ij} vs W_{ji})
Effective connectivity: source-specific decomposition of synaptic cost
Dynamical Analysis:
Geometric dynamics: manifold structure of population activity
Energy landscape: E(r) = -1/2 r^T W r + I^T r
Subspace preservation: principal component overlap between conditions
This implies different experimental observations (elevated PV activity, more GABAergic contacts, reduced excitation) may form a causal cascade rather than parallel mechanisms.
2. Resilience-Generalization Trade-off
Resilient networks:
Preserve function under stress (robust)
But lose flexibility outside training distribution (rigid)
Neurobiological parallel:
Chronic stress patients show preserved routine function but impaired adaptation to novel situations → computational analogue of behavioral rigidity.
3. Energetic Signature
Resilient networks maintain same energy landscape geometry with/without stress, suggesting:
