Illustration by Laurene Boglio
Twitter can feel like a zoo at times, and this week our feeds were wild with excitement at two behavioral modeling studies.
First was a new preprint shared by Benjamin Cowley, a computational neuroscientist at Princeton University, in which he and his colleagues used a deep neural network, or “deep net,” to model a fruit fly’s visual system. “Deep nets are great at predicting visual neurons. Yet they can’t tell us which artificial neuron directly corresponds to a biological neuron… until now!” wrote Cowley.
His results showed “that visual projection neurons at the eye-brain interface form a distributed population code that shapes collective social behavior.”
Excited to share a new manuscript!
Deep nets are great at predicting visual neurons. Still, they can’t tell us which artificial neuron directly corresponds to a biological neuron…until now!https://t.co/nQJ4f7K29c
(yes, that is indeed a fictional female fly, good guess!) pic.twitter.com/PSkexLJldZ
— Benjamin Cowley (@BenjoCowley) July 21, 2022
“Here, biological and artificial knockouts predict neural activity and distributed function in complex brain regions. i’m blinded,” tweeted Cori Bargmann, a neuroscientist at Rockefeller University in New York City.
Classical genetics uses knockouts to infer functional relationships. Here, biological and artificial knockouts predict neural activity and distributed function in complex brain regions. I’m blinded. https://t.co/r1HVxSkxKK
— Cori Bargmann (@betenoire1) July 22, 2022
Dan O’Shea, a neuroscientist at Stanford University in California, was also enthusiastic about the article, stressing that “it improves the traceability of the fly visual system.”
This is such an impressive experimental and computational document, and it underlines the traceability of the visual flight system. So cool! Congratulations! https://t.co/uXt3xdV9Xd
— Dan O’Shea (@djoshea) July 22, 2022
There were many other tweets we couldn’t share, but they all had one thing in common: great excitement about this work and its implications for the future of neuroscience.
Other flight modeling work also had Twitter buzzing — and this one included mice. The team in question announced the release of a new dataset “from real-world behavioral neuroscience experiments.”
The dataset “consists of mouse (9 mil frames) and fly (4 mil frames) social interactions for studying behavioral representation learning!” tweeted Jennifer Sun, a graduate student at the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena.
We are excited to release the MABe Challenge 2022 dataset! ????????
Our dataset consists of mouse (9 mil frames) and fly (4 mil frames) social interactions for studying behavioral representation learning!
Paper: https://t.co/QV1KynfVkR
Challenge: https://t.co/deeqxcf61L pic.twitter.com/cnq4fpcZNI— Jennifer J. Sun (@JenJSun) July 22, 2022
Ann Kennedy, assistant professor of neuroscience at Northwestern University in Chicago, Illinois, who contributed to the dataset and was featured in a Spectrum profile article this week, shared her excitement in a quote tweet.
Super excited to share the dataset + evaluators from this year’s Multi-Agent Behavior Challenge on unsupervised + self-supervised representations of behavior!
We also share the winning entries: three teams used transformers (Perceiver, GPT and BERT), one used Pointnet. https://t.co/5S6EpDjBAh
— Ann Kennedy (@Antihebbiann) July 22, 2022
This may sound like a far-fetched concept, but going back and forth on Twitter can be peaceful, polite, and productive. As proof, we provide such a conversation sparked by a Twitter user @drdebahassistant professor of psychology at the University of New Orleans in Louisiana, after she tweeted about participating in a survey about cannabis use in autism.
“Marijuana may or may not be helpful for autistic youth, although autistic adults who use it frequently have positive things to say. If nothing else, it would make sense to study it more.” << YES! See the flyer below to enter #hemp #Research in #autism pic.twitter.com/JmGautT7Nj
— the tiniest doomwook (@drdebah) Apr 22, 2022
“Really interesting research areabut not a fan of the way some of the ‘demographic’ questions about autism are framed”, Twitter user @science_enby replied.
Really interesting area of research, but not a fan of the way some of the “demographic” questions about autism are set up
— Sam ???????????????????? (@science_enby) July 25, 2022
They delved into a series of tweets, raising issues such as the available series in response to a question when a autism diagnosis has been receivedtweeting, “I’d say there’s a lot more difference between getting a diagnosis at 3 versus 17 than between 75 and 85.”
@science_enby also pointed out issues with the available answers to the survey question and asked respondents about the level of support, tweeting: “It’s really weird to see different autistic traits attributed to different ‘levels of support’.”
A. The problem with ‘functioning levels’ is that they are not static and linear, not just the words
B. Support Needs refers to support needs. It’s Really Weird To See Different Autistic Traits Attributed To Different “Support Levels” (continued) pic.twitter.com/boY7nZmiA7— Sam ???????????????????? (@science_enby) July 25, 2022
“I hear & receive all this feedback!” replied @drdebah, who replied with explanations, but also promised to solve some problems and clarify others in any descriptions of the study.
I hear and receive all this feedback! TY! For IRB purposes, all 1 under 18 parents/guardians were required to respond for them. Hence the under or over 18 distribution. Because more adults responded, we used the typical age survey formats. But toddlers agree with your point. Will fix for sure.
— the tiniest doomwook (@drdebah) July 25, 2022
Agreed. Functioning toddlers change over time. Since the study is an ecological short-term assessment, any information about the current functioning capacity was important. Will definitely mention this point in any comments for clarity.
— the tiniest doomwook (@drdebah) July 25, 2022
And they agree again. Tried to merge the two fields/views/literature on functioning skills and support levels so that it could be understood by parents/guardians and autistic people. Will make it clearer in the future.
— the tiniest doomwook (@drdebah) July 25, 2022
“Thanks for the responses! I definitely appreciate the difficulty of turning turning complex experiences into analysable variables,” tweeted @science_enby in a final response.
Thanks for the responses! I certainly appreciate the difficulty of turning complex experiences into analysable variables.
— Sam ???????????????????? (@science_enby) July 26, 2022
Finally, the Society for Neuroscience announced the appointment of Sabine Kastner as the next editor-in-chief of the Journal of Neuroscience.
SfN is pleased to announce the appointment of Sabine Kastner as the next Editor-in-Chief of #JNeurosciathe most cited magazine in the field of #neuroscience
Read more: https://t.co/dY0DfVK0Oq
???? photo by @Princeton pic.twitter.com/BZ7SojsoZr
— Association of Neurosciences (SfN) (@SfNtweets) July 21, 2022
Princeton Neuroscience Institute called the appointment “fantastic news for Sabine and the field!” in a quote tweet.
Fantastic news for Sabine and the field! Congratulations, Sabine! https://t.co/esWK2Kfwyg
— Princeton Neuroscience (@PrincetonNeuro) July 21, 2022
In response, Nicole C. Rust, an associate professor of psychology at the University of Pennsylvania, called Kastner a “excellent choice.”
Excellent choice @SfNtweets.
— Nicole C Rust, PhD (@NicoleCRust) July 21, 2022
That’s it for this week’s Community Newsletter! If you have suggestions for interesting social posts you’ve seen in the field of autism research, feel free to email [email protected].
follow us on facebook, Twitter (@Spectrum), Instagram and LinkedIn.
Subscribe to make the most of it Spectrum straight to your inbox.
Cite this article: https://doi.org/10.53053/RXHV2963