kendmiller

@kendmiller@qoto.org

Theoretical neuroscience, Columbia University. Focus on cerebral cortical circuits, activity-dependent development (a form of learning) and mature function. More general interest in intelligence & learning, e.g. neuro/AI interface. Politics too.

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

kendmiller, to Neuroscience

Well, they did it. eLife fired Michael Eisen. Absolutely outrageous. The bounds of allowed thought tighten. Any criticism of Israel is out of bounds. A new McCarthyism, except instead of communists under the bed, it's people who think it matters both when Israelis are slaughtered AND when Palestinians are slaughtered. And many, many in the academic community, seeing this, are afraid to speak, especially those without tenure, & even w/ tenure especially those from Middle Eastern countries other than Israel. How easily they can be slandered as anti-semitic should they speak.

Please sign our petition calling for this not to happen, and to defend academic freedom: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfdJyIQzIsTypmmZXIi-RfSjbe4Psp1RIvjXz-DxWJKA5hHIQ/viewform

kendmiller, to Neuroscience

New work with Alessandro Sanzeni, Agostina Palmigiano, Tuan Nguyen, Nicolas Brunel & others in Neuron:

Unveiling the Mechanisms Behind Reshuffling Visual Responses via Optogenetic Stimulation in Mice and Monkeys.

Ale's tweeprint: https://twitter.com/AlessandroSzeni/status/1715468767587643556
Author's share link (free access to Dec 9): https://authors.elsevier.com/a/1hyQd3BtfH5N1R

NicoleCRust, to random
@NicoleCRust@neuromatch.social avatar

Trying to wrap my head around what makes for a good model (of something complicated):

Following on my enthusiasm for a certain type of explanation of "mood" (summarized in this post: https://neuromatch.social/@NicoleCRust/111262116419902198) I'm trying to wrap my head around my lack of enthusiasm for a different type of explanation of the same thing. I'm not here to dump on anyone's work and I suspect that it's probably largely a matter of taste (and I anticipate the other model will resonate better with some other folks). Really just trying to wrap my head around differences in "explanations" of complicated things in ways that invite conversation.

In explanation 1 (which resonates with me): One big goal of the brain is to find good things (and avoid bad ones) and it does this, in part, via reward-based learning. Here, mood is a running average of unexpected rewards and it is formalized in models of reward based learning to demonstrate how "mood" makes learning more efficient. The gist: mood informs us about how things (like our environment) are changing and motivates us to act accordingly. One thing I appreciate about this approach is that it facilitates the mathematical formalization of slippery things (like mood) into models that can be tested, and those models inform not only what mood is but also what it's good for.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4703769/

In explanation 2 (which I struggle a bit more with): One big goal of the brain is to maintain stability in the face of a changing environment. To do that, it has to make predictions and act to minimize its uncertainty (aka minimize free energy via active inference). In this framework, acute emotions signal uncertainty about the environment and mood is a hyperprior that furnishes a higher-level prediction about the value of lower-level emotional states. The purpose of mood is to convey confidence about the consequences of actions. One thing I struggle with is that after I read those words I don't feel that I have a much better sense of what mood is or what it's for than I did before I read them; it's not that I don't understand this framework at large; it's more that I do not experience an "aha" when I read it.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6340107/

What I suspect one difference is: I anticipate that mood is not just about reward-based learning and explanation 1 is really just a slice of what mood is about; in contrast, explanation 2 is more expansive (it's something akin to a theory of everything). But I wonder if this coverage is the same thing that makes explanation 2 a bit too vague for me to appreciate.

Thoughts?

kendmiller,

@violetmadder @WorldImagining @albertcardona @MolemanPeter @NicoleCRust

One of the symptoms of depression is that you suffer the delusion that you are a liability, that the world and in particular your loved ones would be better off without you. This is absolutely a delusion, a symptom of the disease, not a sign of an instinctive socially adaptive mechanism, not based on reality.

Loved ones are absolutely crushed by suicide; they love you, they need you, you are a great plus in their lives, and to lose one they love by suicide is a tragedy and a horror they never completely recover from.

And the delusions that you are a burden in other ways -- at work, say -- are just that, a delusion. Co-workers are thinking the person is doing great, when the person is under the delusion they have failed in their job.

kendmiller,

@JosephMeyer @MolemanPeter @WorldImagining @albertcardona @NicoleCRust

I believe there is a connection between creativity and depression (though this is based on experience, not on real data), but it is definitely not that you are creative while depressed. While in depression it can be a struggle just to get out of bed and eat; creative juices are not flowing. Nothing is flowing, except darkness and pain.

But I think that whatever gives rise to creativity, or at least one form of whatever gives rise to creativity, is linked to a vulnerability to depression. Creativity involves an inward search, deep introspection, far more I think than the average person usually experiences. And rumination, when focused on the painful aspects of one's life (and almost every bit of life has some pain and cringe along with joy and accomplishment) and of one's anticipated future, is a key aspect of depression. Somehow this inward focus that can lead to creativity can also, in some subset at least, yield vulnerability to depression.

NicoleCRust, to random
@NicoleCRust@neuromatch.social avatar

I dipped a toe into Bluesky for a bit and I'm not impressed. A lot of quirky trivia but not so much interaction happening there. To each their own! I have a small pile of invites; if you want to see what it's like, PM me and I'll be happy to pass them along.

kendmiller,

@NicoleCRust I agree with you, there's nothing happening there yet, mostly just decent people goofing off. I think it overall has a better design, so if it got past the invite-only stage and could build up a real critical mass in neuro (or whatever someone's thing is) I think it might be really good. But I don't know when invite-only will go away. Also I hear worries about it being owned by Jack and I don't really know if that's true or what its status is, but it's supposed to be designed so you can seamlessly migrate with all your posts, followers, and followees to any other instance.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • megavids
  • osvaldo12
  • DreamBathrooms
  • mdbf
  • InstantRegret
  • ngwrru68w68
  • magazineikmin
  • everett
  • thenastyranch
  • Youngstown
  • slotface
  • cisconetworking
  • kavyap
  • ethstaker
  • JUstTest
  • modclub
  • GTA5RPClips
  • khanakhh
  • tacticalgear
  • Durango
  • rosin
  • normalnudes
  • Leos
  • provamag3
  • tester
  • cubers
  • anitta
  • lostlight
  • All magazines
    •