John Pearson
banner
jmxpearson.bsky.social
John Pearson
@jmxpearson.bsky.social
Computational neuroscience, neuroML, natural behavior. I charge more for miracles. PI @ pearsonlab.github.io. @dukemedschool.bsky.social.
Agreed. Once I think I know the order of figures, I write. In writing, I often find figs are out of order or missing pieces of the argument I want to make.
November 15, 2025 at 11:18 PM
I always tell people it’s like a guy named JR where that’s his full name.
November 14, 2025 at 11:02 PM
Reposted by John Pearson
Thank you so much for the compliment! Indeed, we also think it aligns well with Gao&Ganguli's theory, while highlighting the role of state-feedback control in low-D dynamics. We have updated the preprint to include more comparisons with M1 recordings.

www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1...
A model of neural population dynamics for flexible sensorimotor control
Modern large-scale recordings have revealed that motor cortex activity during reaching follows low-dimensional dynamics, thought to reflect sensorimotor computations underlying muscle activation. Howe...
www.biorxiv.org
November 14, 2025 at 10:24 AM
Reposted by John Pearson
Just fyi if you are trying to get bridge funds from your
University they might offer them only for grants that got discussed (has been true at Duke). ND can be a death-knell for a program.
November 14, 2025 at 1:10 AM
I take it all back!!
November 14, 2025 at 1:24 AM
Reposted by John Pearson
Agree. That said, "distinguish among" isn't a thing though because reviewers don't compare proposals to one another in study section.
I wonder if the policy is simply a response to an increased number of proposals and a sharply truncated time in which to review them all.
November 14, 2025 at 1:06 AM
Fair enough. But on the (dubious?) theory that more discussion time leads to more informed scores, maybe we reduce some noise.

I agree that a clogged system is likely the driving force.
November 14, 2025 at 1:24 AM