You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
A general framework for dynamic cortical function: the function-through-biased-oscillations (FBO) hypothesis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, June 2015
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnhum.2015.00352 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Gerwin Schalk |
| Abstract |
A central goal of neuroscience is to determine how the brain's relatively static anatomy can support dynamic cortical function, i.e., cortical function that varies according to task demands. In pursuit of this goal, scientists have produced a large number of experimental results and established influential conceptual frameworks, in particular communication-through-coherence (CTC) and gating-by-inhibition (GBI), but these data and frameworks have not provided a parsimonious view of the principles that underlie cortical function. Here I synthesize these existing experimental results and the CTC and GBI frameworks, and propose the function-through-biased-oscillations (FBO) hypothesis as a model to understand dynamic cortical function. The FBO hypothesis suggests that oscillatory voltage amplitude is the principal measurement that directly reflects cortical excitability, that asymmetries in voltage amplitude explain a range of brain signal phenomena, and that predictive variations in such asymmetric oscillations provide a simple and general model for information routing that can help to explain dynamic cortical function. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 115 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 3% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Denmark | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 108 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 35 | 30% |
| Researcher | 17 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 10% |
| Professor | 7 | 6% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 7 | 6% |
| Other | 23 | 20% |
| Unknown | 15 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Neuroscience | 38 | 33% |
| Engineering | 16 | 14% |
| Psychology | 16 | 14% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 12 | 10% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 5% |
| Other | 8 | 7% |
| Unknown | 19 | 17% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 September 2016.
All research outputs
#5,763,624
of 23,577,761 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#2,285
of 7,319 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#58,838
of 241,047 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#53
of 175 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,761 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,319 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 241,047 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 175 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.