↓ Skip to main content

Computing Arm Movements with a Monkey Brainet

Overview of attention for article published in Scientific Reports, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
41 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
165 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Computing Arm Movements with a Monkey Brainet
Published in
Scientific Reports, July 2015
DOI 10.1038/srep10767
Pubmed ID
Authors

Arjun Ramakrishnan, Peter J. Ifft, Miguel Pais-Vieira, Yoon Woo Byun, Katie Z. Zhuang, Mikhail A. Lebedev, Miguel A.L. Nicolelis

Abstract

Traditionally, brain-machine interfaces (BMIs) extract motor commands from a single brain to control the movements of artificial devices. Here, we introduce a Brainet that utilizes very-large-scale brain activity (VLSBA) from two (B2) or three (B3) nonhuman primates to engage in a common motor behaviour. A B2 generated 2D movements of an avatar arm where each monkey contributed equally to X and Y coordinates; or one monkey fully controlled the X-coordinate and the other controlled the Y-coordinate. A B3 produced arm movements in 3D space, while each monkey generated movements in 2D subspaces (X-Y, Y-Z, or X-Z). With long-term training we observed increased coordination of behavior, increased correlations in neuronal activity between different brains, and modifications to neuronal representation of the motor plan. Overall, performance of the Brainet improved owing to collective monkey behaviour. These results suggest that primate brains can be integrated into a Brainet, which self-adapts to achieve a common motor goal.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 193 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 165 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 2%
Japan 3 2%
United Kingdom 2 1%
Brazil 2 1%
Portugal 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 152 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 35 21%
Researcher 31 19%
Student > Master 24 15%
Student > Bachelor 18 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 10 6%
Other 23 14%
Unknown 24 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 27 16%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 25 15%
Engineering 25 15%
Computer Science 14 8%
Psychology 12 7%
Other 31 19%
Unknown 31 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 403. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 July 2023.
All research outputs
#74,880
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#1,018
of 141,879 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#680
of 276,301 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#8
of 2,038 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 141,879 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 276,301 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2,038 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.