Abstract:figure legend Neural networks execute the transformation of inputs into the neural activity that enables the execution of a task. Thus, they have the potential to establish causal relationships between the input, the elements of a circuit, the network activity, and eventually behavior. When the purpose of building a model is to understand the mechanisms that enable behavior in biological circuits, the design of network models should be guided by three principles: (1) biological constraints are necessary (e.g., connectivity), (2) the network activity should match the recorded activity, and (3) the network should be able to perform the task of interest. Machine‐learning‐based training can help accomplish these goals. Due to the staggering complexity of the brain and its neural circuitry, neuroscientists rely on the analysis of mathematical models to elucidate its function. From Hodgkin and Huxley's detailed description of the action potential in 1952 to today, new theories and increasing computational power have opened up novel avenues to study how neural circuits implement the computations that underlie behavior. Computational neuroscientists have developed many models of neural circuits that differ in complexity, biological realism, or emergent network properties. With recent advances in experimental techniques for detailed anatomical reconstructions of large‐scale activity recordings, precise biological data has become more available. The challenge when building network models is to reflect experimental results, either through a high level of detail or by finding an appropriate level of abstraction. Meanwhile, machine learning has facilitated the development of artificial neural networks (ANN), which are trained to perform specific tasks. While they have proven successful at achieving task‐oriented behavior, they are often abstract constructs that differ in many features from the physiology of brain circuits. Thus, it is unclear whether the mechanisms underlying computation in biological circuits can be investigated by analyzing artificial networks that accomplish the same function but differ in their mechanisms. Here, we argue that building biologically realistic network models is crucial to establishing causal relationships between neurons, synapses, circuits, and behavior. More specifically, we advocate for network models that consider the connectivity structure and the recorded activity dynamics while evaluating task performance.

Why scholars are diagramming neural network models

A Framework for Improving Scholarly Neural Network Diagrams

Visualizing and Understanding Neural Models in NLP

Neural Circuit Diagrams: Robust Diagrams for the Communication, Implementation, and Analysis of Deep Learning Architectures

Understanding Spatial Diagram Structure: An Analysis of Hierarchies, Matrices, and Networks

Getting symbols out of a neural architecture

A Comprehensive Review of Deep Neural Network Interpretation Using Topological Data Analysis

Neurosymbolic Models for Computer Graphics

Hierarchies of description enable understanding of cognitive phenomena in terms of neuron activity

Brain network communication: concepts, models and applications

How to incorporate biological insights into network models and why it matters

A Peek Into the Reasoning of Neural Networks: Interpreting with Structural Visual Concepts

A Method for the Symbolic Representation of Neurons

Introducing the diagrammatic semiotic mode

Formal Conceptual Views in Neural Networks

The Algebra of Open and Interconnected Systems

Diagrammatization: Rationalizing with diagrammatic AI explanations for abductive-deductive reasoning on hypotheses

On the Anatomy of Attention

Neurosymbolic AI for Reasoning on Graph Structures: A Survey

A Logical Neural Network Structure With More Direct Mapping From Logical Relations

Two's company, three (or more) is a simplex: Algebraic-topological tools for understanding higher-order structure in neural data