Mathematical Integral in Neuroscience Paper

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around a mathematical result in a neuroscience paper, specifically focusing on the derivation of equation 7 and the assumptions made in the process. Participants explore the implications of exponential decay and symmetry in integrals within the context of the paper.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses difficulty in understanding how the authors of the paper derive equation 7, suggesting that they discard terms based on the assumption of exponential decay.
  • The same participant notes that the symmetry of the integral may have been used to change the limits, but seeks clarification on this point.
  • Another participant humorously offers to help if compensated, indicating a lack of access to the full paper.
  • A different participant provides information about the paper being part of a published book and suggests a method to access it through Amazon's search feature, though they admit they cannot assist with the mathematical derivation.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the derivation of equation 7, and multiple viewpoints regarding access to the paper and its content are presented.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty about specific mathematical steps and assumptions made in the paper, particularly regarding the treatment of terms in the integral.

Who May Find This Useful

Readers interested in mathematical methods in neuroscience, integral calculus, or those seeking collaborative problem-solving in academic contexts may find this discussion relevant.

madness
Messages
813
Reaction score
69
Hi everyone,

I'm having trouble getting a mathematical result in the following paper:

http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-540-88853-6_4#page-1

In particular, I can't figure out how they reach equation 7. They use equations (3) and (5), and I think they discard a lot of the terms in the integral based on the assumption that A decays exponentially or faster. I think they also use the symmetry of the integral to change the limits. Can anyone figure it out?
 
Biology news on Phys.org
Well, madman, if you wanted to send me 30 clams (US), I may be able to look into that for you since I can only get the abstract without paying. I'd use my own money, but I'm saving the $30 to go see "Man of steel" this weekend after loading up for the fun with a few tacos:smile: Sorry.
 
DiracPool said:
Well, madman, if you wanted to send me 30 clams (US), I may be able to look into that for you since I can only get the abstract without paying. I'd use my own money, but I'm saving the $30 to go see "Man of steel" this weekend after loading up for the fun with a few tacos:smile: Sorry.

You'd earn $0.05! Or maybe not, final prices depend on local VAT ...
 
The cited paper has been collected and published in a book "Dynamic Brain - from Neural Spikes to Behaviors: 12th International Summer School on Neural Networks, Erice, Italy, December 5-12, 2007, Revised". I found it on amazon.com. The key point is that amazon allows for searching inside the book. By searching on "Yoshioka" (one of the coauthors of the paper), I was able to find the paper and scroll to the relevant page. I was stimulated by the searching problem, not the neuroscience and I can't help with the derivation. But now atyy can both look at the paper for free and watch Superman. What a great start to the weekend!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
12K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
6K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
9K