@KordingLab @AdamMarblestone what say ye?
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0896627319306956 …
i thought you disagreed with that?
-
-
Replying to @neuro_data @KordingLab
Overall I think we were optimistic about possibilities for every-spike neural recording. We focused a lot on physical limitations, but also on workarounds for them. We were particularly optimistic in tone/emphasis, I think, about implanted optics, implanted chips communicating
1 reply 1 retweet 1 like -
optically, anti-scattering / phase conjugation, and hybrids of ultrasound and optics. We had a bit less emphasis on specific possibilities to really do it for electrical and molecular, but we definitely didn't rule it out. As far as electrical, in retrospect I think we should
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
have gone further and that this paper does a better job. We mostly asked what was the minimum number of electrodes you would need and what that would imply for trace widths. Now, this paper gives a specific proposal in the oversampled regime, w/ ~ as many electrodes as neurons.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
It runs up closely against heating by the amplifiers, and it requires 30 nanometer lithography on a diamond CYLINDER... But it is a more specific existence proof than we had that operates within the same limits we talk about.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
In fact what I most wanted with our paper is to stimulate papers like this that do concrete roadmaps for specific technologies in light of addressing the physics issues up front. Because there are a lot of other such papers that could be done for different technologies.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.