This clinical trial focuses on testing the efficacy of different digital interventions to promote re-engagement in cancer-related long-term follow-up care for adolescent and young adult (AYA) survivors of childhood cancer.
A fundamental problem in neuroscience is how the brain computes with noisy neurons. An advantage of population codes is that downstream neurons can pool across multiple neurons to reduce the impact of noise. However, this benefit depends on the noise associated with each neuron being independent. Noise correlations refer to the covariance of noise between pairs of neurons, and such correlations can limit the advantages gained from pooling across large neural populations. Indeed, a large body of theoretical work argues that positive noise correlations between similarly tuned neurons reduce the representational capacity of neural populations and are thus detrimental to neural computation. Despite this apparent disadvantage, such noise correlations are observed across many different brain regions, persist even in well-trained subjects, and are dynamically altered in complex tasks. The investigators have advanced the hypothesis that noise correlations may be a neural mechanism for reducing the dimensionality of learning problems. The viability of this hypothesis has been demonstrated in neural network simulations where noise correlations, when embedded in populations with fixed signal-to-noise ratio, enhance the speed and robustness of learning. Here the investigators aim to empirically test this hypothesis, using a combination of computational modeling, fMRI and pupillometry. Establishing a link between noise correlations and learning would open the door to an investigation into how brains navigate a tradeoff between representational capacity and the speed of learning.
Cognitive and Molecular Challenges to Statistical Inference Across Healthy Aging
Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.
| Inclusion Criteria | Exclusion Criteria |
|---|---|
|
|
Sponsor: Brown University
These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.