↓ Skip to main content

Active SAmpling Protocol (ASAP) to Optimize Individual Neurocognitive Hypothesis Testing: A BCI-Inspired Dynamic Experimental Design

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Readers on

mendeley
41 Mendeley
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.
Title
Active SAmpling Protocol (ASAP) to Optimize Individual Neurocognitive Hypothesis Testing: A BCI-Inspired Dynamic Experimental Design
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, July 2016
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2016.00347
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gaëtan Sanchez, Françoise Lecaignard, Anatole Otman, Emmanuel Maby, Jérémie Mattout

Abstract

The relatively young field of Brain-Computer Interfaces has promoted the use of electrophysiology and neuroimaging in real-time. In the meantime, cognitive neuroscience studies, which make extensive use of functional exploration techniques, have evolved toward model-based experiments and fine hypothesis testing protocols. Although these two developments are mostly unrelated, we argue that, brought together, they may trigger an important shift in the way experimental paradigms are being designed, which should prove fruitful to both endeavors. This change simply consists in using real-time neuroimaging in order to optimize advanced neurocognitive hypothesis testing. We refer to this new approach as the instantiation of an Active SAmpling Protocol (ASAP). As opposed to classical (static) experimental protocols, ASAP implements online model comparison, enabling the optimization of design parameters (e.g., stimuli) during the course of data acquisition. This follows the well-known principle of sequential hypothesis testing. What is radically new, however, is our ability to perform online processing of the huge amount of complex data that brain imaging techniques provide. This is all the more relevant at a time when physiological and psychological processes are beginning to be approached using more realistic, generative models which may be difficult to tease apart empirically. Based upon Bayesian inference, ASAP proposes a generic and principled way to optimize experimental design adaptively. In this perspective paper, we summarize the main steps in ASAP. Using synthetic data we illustrate its superiority in selecting the right perceptual model compared to a classical design. Finally, we briefly discuss its future potential for basic and clinical neuroscience as well as some remaining challenges.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Switzerland 1 2%
Unknown 40 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 22%
Researcher 7 17%
Student > Bachelor 4 10%
Student > Postgraduate 2 5%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 5 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 8 20%
Psychology 7 17%
Engineering 7 17%
Computer Science 4 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 5%
Other 6 15%
Unknown 7 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 08 July 2016.
All research outputs
#15,379,002
of 22,879,161 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#5,277
of 7,169 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#226,287
of 355,359 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#139
of 177 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,879,161 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,169 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 355,359 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 177 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.