Interested in human replay and solid methods? Jointly with @skjerns.de we're releasing a benchmark dataset with known ground-truth neural sequences in MEG & fMRI, for developing & validating replay methods. First test: existing methods show similar effect sizes, but room to improve shorturl.at/6TgIr
Now out in Nature Neuroscience: "Fixation duration on natural scenes is explained by memory encoding not processing demand".
www.nature.com/articles/s41...
Our eyes don't linger because recognition is hard; they linger to remember. Let me take you on a quick tour. 🧵
Paying peer reviewers works.
Expanded Fast & Fair experiment @biologyopen.bsky.social:
• 5.5 vs 37.7 working days to decision with reviews
• ~3 vs ~9 reviewer invitations per manuscript
• no reduction in editor-assessed review quality
• similar acceptance rates
www.biorxiv.org/content/10.6...
Biopsych Community, we are ready and can‘t wait to
welcome you to Heidelberg! #PUG2026
By combining magnetoencephalography and eye tracking, this study sheds light on why people fixate on some parts of natural scenes longer than others. Rather than visual complexity, fixation durations ...
Studies in rodents and humans using invasive electrophysiology have established that neural replay is a ubiquitous phenomenon in the brain that is associated with a wide range of cognitive functions, ...
Honored to be giving a keynote at Psychology and the Brain (PuG) this week in Heidelberg. Since starting the lab in 2019, we’ve had many wonderful collaborations across Germany, and I’m excited to share our work on the computational neuroscience of interoception. See you there! pug2026.org
An ordinal Language of Thought supports human memory for regular sequences https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.05.14.725160v1
No they don't! Humans report being conscious half of the time when awoken from NREM sleep.
The NREM/REM, conscious/unconscious dichotomy has been thoroughly debunked.
It's time we stop oversimplifying the relationship between sleep and consciousness!
1/ Can AI help researchers check whether published social science results actually reproduce? In our new PNAS paper, we tested this directly in the AI Replication Games: 288 researchers, 103 teams, and real replication packages from quantitative social science.
