Centre for Human Brain Health University of Birmingham UK

In the 17th century, physician Marcello Malpighi observed the existence of distinctive patterns of ridges and sweat glands on fingertips. This was a major breakthrough, and originated a long and continuing quest for ways to uniquely identify individuals based on fingerprints, a technique massively used until today. It is only in the past few years that technologies and methodologies have achieved high-quality measures of an individual’s brain to the extent that personality traits and behavior can be characterized. The concept of “fingerprints of the brain” is very novel and has been boosted thanks to a seminal publication by Finn et al. in 2015. They were among the firsts to show that an individual’s functional brain connectivity profile is both unique and reliable, similarly to a fingerprint, and that it is possible to identify an individual among a large group of subjects solely on the basis of her or his connectivity profile. Yet, the discovery of brain fingerprints opened up a plethora of new questions. In particular, what exactly is the information encoded in brain connectivity patterns that ultimately leads to correctly differentiating someone’s connectome from anybody else’s? In other words, what makes our brains unique? In this talk I am going to partially address these open questions while keeping a personal viewpoint on the subject. I will outline the main findings, discuss potential issues, and propose future directions in the quest for identifiability of human brain networks.

Recent insights from auditory neuroscience provide a new perspective on how the brain encodes speech. Using these recent insights, I will provide an overview of key factors underpinning individual differences in children’s development of language and phonology, providing a context for exploring atypical reading development (dyslexia). Children with dyslexia are relatively insensitive to acoustic cues related to speech rhythm patterns. This lack of rhythmic sensitivity is related to the atypical neural encoding of rhythm patterns in speech by the brain. I will describe our recent data from infants as well as children, demonstrating developmental continuity in the key neural variables.

There are many mysteries in the universe. One of the most significant, often considered the final frontier in science, is understanding how our subjective experience, or consciousness, emerges from the collective action of neurons in biological systems. While substantial progress has been made over the past decades, a unified and widely accepted explanation of the neural mechanisms underpinning consciousness remains elusive. The field is rife with theories that frequently provide contradictory explanations of the phenomenon. To accelerate progress, we have adopted a new model of science: adversarial collaboration in team science. Our goal is to test theories of consciousness in an adversarial setting. Adversarial collaboration offers a unique way to bolster creativity and rigor in scientific research by merging the expertise of teams with diverse viewpoints. Ideally, we aim to harness collective intelligence, embracing various perspectives, to expedite the uncovering of scientific truths. In this talk, I will highlight the effectiveness (and challenges) of this approach using selected case studies, showcasing its potential to counter biases, challenge traditional viewpoints, and foster innovative thought. Through the joint design of experiments, teams incorporate a competitive aspect, ensuring comprehensive exploration of problems. This method underscores the importance of structured conflict and diversity in propelling scientific advancement and innovation.

Psychology and neuroscience are increasingly looking to fine-grained analyses of decision-making behaviour, seeking to characterise not just the variation between subjects but also a subject's variability across time. When analysing the behaviour of each subject in a choice task, we ideally want to know not only when the subject has learnt the correct choice rule but also what the subject tried while learning. I introduce a simple but effective Bayesian approach to inferring the probability of different choice strategies at trial resolution. This can be used both for inferring when subjects learn, by tracking the probability of the strategy matching the target rule, and for inferring subjects use of exploratory strategies during learning. Applied to data from rodent and human decision tasks, we find learning occurs earlier and more often than estimated using classical approaches. Around both learning and changes in the rewarded rules the exploratory strategies of win-stay and lose-shift, often considered complementary, are consistently used independently. Indeed, we find the use of lose-shift is strong evidence that animals have latently learnt the salient features of a new rewarded rule. Our approach can be extended to any discrete choice strategy, and its low computational cost is ideally suited for real-time analysis and closed-loop control.

Sound waves can be used to modify brain activity safely and transiently with unprecedented precision even deep in the brain - unlike traditional brain stimulation methods. In a series of studies in humans and non-human primates, I will show that Transcranial Ultrasound Stimulation (TUS) can have medium- to long-lasting effects. Multiple read-outs allow us to conclude that TUS can perturb neuronal tissues up to 2h after intervention, including changes in local and distributed brain network configurations, behavioural changes, task-related neuronal changes and chemical changes in the sonicated focal volume. Combined with multiple neuroimaging techniques (resting state functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging [rsfMRI], Spectroscopy [MRS] and task-related fMRI changes), this talk will focus on recent human TUS studies.

In our daily lives, we perceive things as possessing a mind (e.g., people) or lacking one (e.g., shoes). Intriguingly, how much mind we attribute to people can vary, with real people perceived to have more mind than depictions of individuals, such as photographs. Drawing from a range of research methodologies, including naturalistic observation, mobile eye tracking, and surreptitious behavior monitoring, I discuss how various shades of mind influence human attention and behaviour. The findings suggest the novel concept that overt attention (where one looks) in real-life is fundamentally supported by covert attention (attending to someone out of the corner of one's eye).