Seminars

Join Us for the Memory Decoding Journal Club! A collaboration of the Carboncopies Foundation and BPF Aspirational Neuroscience. This time, we’re diving into a groundbreaking paper: "Motor learning selectively strengthens cortical and striatal synapses of motor engram neurons

Pharmacokinetics in the eye is an important factor for the success of ocular drug delivery and treatment. Pharmacokinetic features determine the feasible routes of drug administration, dosing levels and intervals, and it has impact on eventual drug responses. Several physical, biochemical, and flow-related barriers limit drug exposure of anterior and posterior ocular target tissues during treatment during local (topical, subconjunctival, intravitreal) and systemic administration (intravenous, per oral). Mathematical models integrate joint impact of various barriers on ocular pharmacokinetics (PKs) thereby helping drug development. The models are useful in describing (top-down) and predicting (bottom-up) pharmacokinetics of ocular drugs. This is useful also in the design and development of new drug molecules and drug delivery systems. Furthermore, the models can be used for interspecies translation and probing of disease effects on pharmacokinetics. In this lecture, ocular pharmacokinetics and current modelling methods (noncompartmental analyses, compartmental, physiologically based, and finite element models) are introduced. Future challenges are also highlighted (e.g. intra-tissue distribution, prediction of drug responses, active transport).

Fear learning induces synaptic potentiation between engram neurons in the rat lateral amygdala. This study by Marios Abatis et al. demonstrates how fear conditioning strengthens synaptic connections between engram cells in the lateral amygdala, revealed through optogenetic identification of neuronal ensembles and electrophysiological measurements. The work provides crucial insights into memory formation mechanisms at the synaptic level, with implications for understanding anxiety disorders and developing targeted interventions. Presented by Dr. Kenneth Hayworth, this journal club will explore the paper's methodology linking engram cell reactivation with synaptic plasticity measurements, and discuss implications for memory decoding research.

Facial expressions are inherently dynamic, and our visual system is sensitive to subtle changes in their temporal sequence. However, researchers often use dynamic morphs of photographs—simplified, linear representations of motion—to study the neural correlates of dynamic face perception. To explore the brain's sensitivity to natural facial motion, we constructed a novel dynamic face database using generative neural networks, trained on a verified set of video-recorded emotional expressions. The resulting deepfakes, consciously indistinguishable from videos, enabled us to separate biological motion from photorealistic form. Results showed that conventional dynamic morphs elicit distinct responses in the brain compared to videos and photos, suggesting they violate expectations (n400) and have reduced social salience (late positive potential). This suggests that dynamic morphs misrepresent facial dynamism, resulting in misleading insights about the neural and behavioural correlates of face perception. Deepfakes and videos elicited largely similar neural responses, suggesting they could be used as a proxy for real faces in vision research, where video recordings cannot be experimentally manipulated. And yet, despite being consciously undetectable as fake, deepfakes elicited an expectation violation response in the brain. This points to a neural sensitivity to naturalistic facial motion, beyond conscious awareness. Despite some differences in neural responses, the realism and manipulability of deepfakes make them a valuable asset for research where videos are unfeasible. Using these stimuli, we proposed a novel marker for the conscious perception of naturalistic facial motion – Frontal delta activity – which was elevated for videos and deepfakes, but not for photos or dynamic morphs.

Join us for the Memory Decoding Journal Club, a collaboration between the Carboncopies Foundation and BPF Aspirational Neuroscience. This month, we're diving into a groundbreaking paper: 'Reconstructing a new hippocampal engram for systems reconsolidation and remote memory updating' by Bo Lei, Bilin Kang, Yuejun Hao, Haoyu Yang, Zihan Zhong, Zihan Zhai, and Yi Zhong from Tsinghua University, Beijing Academy of Artificial Intelligence, IDG/McGovern Institute of Brain Research, and Peking Union Medical College. Dr. Randal Koene will guide us through an engaging discussion on these exciting findings and their implications for neuroscience and memory research.

How can the hippocampal system transition from episodic one-shot learning to a multi-shot learning regime and what is the utility of the resultant neural representations? This talk will explore the role of the dentate gyrus (DG) anatomy in this context. The canonical DG model suggests it performs pattern separation. More recent experimental results challenge this standard model, suggesting DG function is more complex and also supports the precise binding of objects and events to space and the integration of information across episodes. Very recent studies attribute pattern separation and pattern integration to anatomically distinct parts of the DG (the suprapyramidal blade vs the infrapyramidal blade). We propose a computational model that investigates this distinction. In the model the two processing streams (potentially localized in separate blades) contribute to the storage of distinct episodic memories, and the integration of information across episodes, respectively. The latter forms generalized expectations across episodes, eventually forming a cognitive map. We train the model with two data sets, MNIST and plausible entorhinal cortex inputs. The comparison between the two streams allows for the calculation of a prediction error, which can drive the storage of poorly predicted memories and the forgetting of well-predicted memories. We suggest that differential processing across the DG aids in the iterative construction of spatial cognitive maps to serve the generation of location-dependent expectations, while at the same time preserving episodic memory traces of idiosyncratic events.

Over the past thirty years or so, cognitive neuroscience has made spectacular progress understanding the biological mechanisms of consciousness. Consciousness science, as this field is now sometimes called, was not only inexistent thirty years ago, but its very name seemed like an oxymoron: how can there be a science of consciousness? And yet, despite this scepticism, we are now equipped with a rich set of sophisticated behavioural paradigms, with an impressive array of techniques making it possible to see the brain in action, and with an ever-growing collection of theories and speculations about the putative biological mechanisms through which information processing becomes conscious. This is all good and fine, even promising, but we also seem to have thrown the baby out with the bathwater, or at least to have forgotten it in the crib: consciousness is not just mechanisms, it’s what it feels like. In other words, while we know thousands of informative studies about access-consciousness, we have little in the way of phenomenal consciousness. But that — what it feels like — is truly what “consciousness” is about. Understanding why it feels like something to be me and nothing (panpsychists notwithstanding) for a stone to be a stone is what the field has always been after. However, while it is relatively easy to study access-consciousness through the contrastive approach applied to reports, it is much less clear how to study phenomenology, its structure and its function. Here, I first overview work on what consciousness does (the "how"). Next, I ask what difference feeling things makes and what function phenomenology might play. I argue that subjective experience has intrinsic value and plays a functional role in everything that we do.

Why do individuals, both humans and animals, exhibit personal biases in two-alternative decision-making tasks, even when no clear reason exists to favor one alternative over another? In this talk, I will explore two competing hypotheses to explain these idiosyncratic biases. The first suggests that such tendencies arise from unique personal experiences, where past associations between actions and feedback influence future choices. The second hypothesis proposes that the bias reflects irreducible microscopic heterogeneities in the dynamics of decision-making networks. I will present experimental data and theoretical findings that support the latter hypothesis, shedding new light on the neural mechanisms behind seemingly irrational preferences. Presented in the van Vreeswijk Theoretical Neuroscience Seminar series (formerly WWTNS) on 2025-03-05. Recording duration: 00:50:36.

Vulnerability to distraction varies across the general population and significantly affects one’s capacity to stay focused on and successfully complete the task at hand, whether at school, on the road, or at work. In this talk, I will begin by discussing how distractibility is typically assessed in the literature and introduce our innovative ERP approach to measuring it. Since distractibility is a cardinal symptom of ADHD, I will introduce its most widely used paper-and-pencil screening tool for the general population as external validation. Following that, I will present the Load Theory of Attention and explain how we used perceptual load to test the reliability of our neural marker of distractibility. Finally, I will highlight potential future applications of this marker in clinical and educational settings.