//
sign in
Profile
by @danabra.mov
Profile
by @dansshadow.bsky.social
Profile
by @jimpick.com
AviHandle
by @danabra.mov
AviHandle
by @dansshadow.bsky.social
AviHandle
by @katherine.computer
EventsList
by @katherine.computer
ProfileHeader
by @dansshadow.bsky.social
ProfileHeader
by @danabra.mov
ProfileMedia
by @danabra.mov
ProfilePlays
by @danabra.mov
ProfilePosts
by @danabra.mov
ProfilePosts
by @dansshadow.bsky.social
ProfileReplies
by @danabra.mov
Record
by @atsui.org
Skircle
by @danabra.mov
StreamPlacePlaylist
by @katherine.computer
+ new component
ProfileReplies









Loading...
By comparing fMRI to LFP coherence one thing stood out ▶️ low-frequency coherence (<4 Hz) consistently tracked fMRI effects across all manipulations! Higher frequencies also change (sometimes a lot), but they don’t covary with fMRI. So slow neuronal coupling is the common denominator of fMRI! 12/n
2mo
Notably, biophysical modelling supports this framework. Using a simple three-node model we found that local excitability changes are sufficient to reproduce the direction of the low-frequency coherence effects across perturbations. This offers a plausible mechanistic account of our results! 14/n
Alessandro Gozzi
2mo
Thank you very much! That genuinely means a lot.