Back

How sparse can a fly-brain model be? Connection strength, wiring placement, network state and task jointly determine function-preserving compression of the Drosophila connectome

An, D.

2026-09-24 neuroscience
10.64898/2026.09.19.752860 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Whole-brain connectomes are increasingly used as wiring diagrams for spiking simulations and as structural priors for artificial networks, usually after an ad hoc synapse-count threshold whose effect on validated function has never been measured. We define function-preserving sparsification - removing edges under a fixed budget while preserving validated behaviour and population responses - and study it in the leaky integrate-and-fire whole-brain model of Shiu et al. (2024). Six operators - weak-synapse pruning, uniform and weight-proportional random removal, degree-preserving rewiring, weight shuffling and a task-aware criterion - were compared at identical edge budgets across three validated circuits (sugar-evoked proboscis extension, its bitter suppression, grooming pathway specificity), silent and spontaneously active network states, and multiple seeds. Weak-synapse pruning preserves 79% of feeding output with 6% of edges, with a cliff at k* of approximately 9 synapses, whereas random, degree-preserving and weight-shuffled controls at the same budget abolish output, and weight-proportional random sampling survives only while it retains the strong-edge set: function resides in the conjunction of wiring placement and strength, not in degree statistics or synaptic mass. The cliff is task-dependent - grooming specificity collapses below k = 2 through disinhibition. In the active state failure changes character: output over-excites instead of vanishing, and bitter suppression is lost progressively from k = 5 and reverses at k = 31. A task-aware criterion preserves its training stimulus at 0.4% of edges but loses held-out inhibition first. These results provide a first benchmark for connectome sparsification and show that what must be kept depends on task and network state.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.