Altering brain dynamics with transcranial random noise stimulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Random noise can enhance the detectability of weak signals in nonlinear systems, a phenomenon known as stochastic resonance (SR). This concept is not only applicable to single threshold systems but can also be applied to dynamical systems with multiple attractor states, such as observed during the phenomenon of binocular rivalry. Binocular rivalry can be characterized by marginally stable attractor states between which the brain switches in a spontaneous, stochastic manner. Here we used a computational model to predict the effect of noise on perceptual dominance durations. Subsequently we compared the model prediction to a series of experiments where we measured binocular rivalry dynamics when noise (zero-mean Gaussian random noise) was added either to the visual stimulus (Exp. 1) or directly to the visual cortex (Exp. 2) by applying transcranial Random Noise Stimulation (tRNS 1 mA, 100-640 Hz zero -mean Gaussian random noise). We found that adding noise significantly reduced the mixed percept duration (Exp. 1 and Exp. 2). Our results are the first to demonstrate that both central and peripheral noise can influence state-switching dynamics of binocular rivalry under specific conditions (e.g. low visual contrast stimuli), in line with a SR-mechanism.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".