helmholtz.social ist einer von vielen unabhängigen Mastodon-Servern, mit dem du dich im Fediverse beteiligen kannst.
Diese Mastodon-Instanz dient der institutionellen Wissenschaftskommunikation der Helmholtz-Gemeinschaft, ihrer Mitgliedszentren und ausgewählter Helmholtz-Initiativen.

Serverstatistik:

22
aktive Profile

#neuroscience

48 Beiträge43 Beteiligte0 Beiträge heute

Rhythms of the Brain

academic.oup.com/book/11166

> Abstract. Studies of mechanisms in the brain that allow complicated things to happen in a coordinated fashion have produced some of the most spectacular discoveries in #neuroscience. This book provides support for the idea that spontaneous neuron activity, far from being mere noise, is actually the source of our cognitive abilities.

#science #music

A basic understanding of neuroscience is the required prerequisite knowledge for this book

The discovery of ‘ovoid cells’ is transforming our understanding of memory and may pave the way for new treatments for Alzheimer’s disease, epilepsy, and other neurological conditions.

These highly specialized neurons activate each time we encounter something new, triggering a process that stores those objects in memory and allowing us to recognize them months—potentially even years—later.

scitechdaily.com/scientists-di

#neuroscience
#brain
#neurons
#OvoidCells
#memory

When I read research papers that are the result of very expensive work (experiments or simulations) I always want to know: how could this project have possibly ended with a null result? And is there an argument in this paper that compares the actual result to this null? If not, I'm very suspicious.

Actually this is a good question to ask about any paper, but the high stakes of super expensive research make it particularly important to ask the question. In my experience, it is surprisingly rarely answered in the paper and I find it hard to believe in these results.

When I transitioned from cognitive to computational neuroscience, I found myself in a bit of a bind. I had learned calculus, but I had progressed little beyond pattern recognition: I knew which rules to apply to find solutions to which equations, but the equations themselves lacked any sort of real meaning for me.

So I struggled with understanding how formulas could be implemented in code and why the code I was reading could be described by those formulas. Resources explaining math “for neuroscientists” were unfortunately quite useless for me, because they usually presented the necessary equations for describing various neural systems, assuming the presence of that basic understanding/intuition I lacked.

Of course, I figured things out eventually (otherwise I wouldn’t be writing about it), but I’m 85% sure I’m not the only one who’s ever struggled with this, and so I wrote the tutorial I wish I could’ve had. If you’re in a similar position, I hope you’ll find it useful. And if not, maybe it helps you get a glimpse into the struggles of the non-math people in your life. Either way, it has cats.

neurofrontiers.blog/building-a

Neurofrontiers · Building a virtual neuron - part 1 - NeurofrontiersYou might think math is difficult, but each one of your neurons solves equations on a daily basis and you have billions of them.

🛌 Can wearables match PSG for sleep research?

The Wearanize+ study explores multimodal sleep tracking, combining:
📌 Zmax (EEG)
📌 Empatica E4 (PPG, EDA)
📌 ActivPAL (Movement)
📌 Mentalab Explore Pro (PSG-grade signals)

With 130 participants, this open dataset could advance machine learning models for wearable-based sleep scoring.

🔗 Read more: doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/dth8y_

#SleepResearch #Wearables #EEG #PSG #Neuroscience

Symbolic PSG image taken from Wikimedia.