The NeuroMat technology-transfer team has been active in the creation and spreading of free and open-source software tools and materials on how to use efficiently these tools. Such activities are in tune with the commitment that NeuroMat, the Research, Innovation and Dissemination Center for Neuromathematics, has embraced in relying exclusively on open-science tools and becoming a reference in open science.
The Research, Innovation and Dissemination Center for Neuromathematics (CEPID NeuroMat) software development team released in October the first module of Neuroscience Experiments System (NES), an open-source tool to manage clinical data gathered in hospitals and research institutions.
NeuroMat released at the end of September the First Report of Activities. This document is required by the São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP), the funding entity of the Research, Innovation and Dissemination Center for Neuromathematics (CEPID NeuroMat), and presented detailed accounts of scientific, dissemination and technology-transfer activities.
The challenge of developing Bayesian statistical models to make sense of brain patterns registered in Electroencephalograms (EEGs) is the ongoing effort of the Research, Innovation and Dissemination Center for Neuromathematics (CEPID NeuroMat) post doctoral fellow Michelle Ferreira Miranda. Her research is being conducted in a partnership with neuroscientists of the Institute of Neurology Deolindo Couto, from the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro (INDC/UFRJ), who are also part of the NeuroMat research team.
The development of new scientific areas imposes a set of challenges to communicating and disseminating news on such development. Results are in the making, conceptual frameworks remain under construction and often at a high level of abstraction, levels of uncertainty are generally unavoidable. This scenario leads to a dilemma to any serious attempt of communicating and disseminating cutting-edge and ongoing scientific work: to rely on well-established repertoires of communication with the risk of systematically failing to keep track of standards these repertoires require, or to advance new means of communicating and disseminating in parallel to the development of new scientific areas. This second part of the dilemma –which suggests including the science of communication in the realm of broader scientific agendas– involves high risk-taking in the process of reporting scientific enterprises.
Featuring this week:
Stay informed on our latest news!
|Follow Us on Facebook|