Reference

Glossary

Start by keeping the words straight

Mind Uploading Research Project

Public Page Updated: 2026-04-04 Living document (updated with bridge-witness, intrinsic-excitability / ionic route-card, and thermal-route sync)

How to use this page

Read this first to avoid getting lost

This page is a glossary for the terms that appear most often in Mind-Upload. It starts with short everyday-language explanations, then points you back to the more rigorous pages when needed.

  • It gives short explanations of terms and points to where each concept matters.
  • It now includes the front-door verification terms added in the March 2026 re-audit, such as claim ceiling, shortcut auditing, maintenance-state, and vascular-state / CVR audit.
  • It now also includes the human-observability and support-state terms needed after the late-March and early-April 2026 deepening passes, such as proxy class, route maturity / model burden, route role, calibrator role, support-state proxy, glial substrate-routing, target-defined astrocyte-related proxy, and macro clearance-transport proxy family.
  • It now also defines the newer route-card semantics added in the late-March 2026 passes, such as field-formation wall, Fusion Card, Human Proxy Composition Card, shared-driver audit, strongest single row, and State-Continuity Bridge Card.
  • It now also makes the effective-connectivity stop line explicit at the front door: effective-connectivity route card, observed-subsystem closure / latent-confound audit, node-definition policy, processing / first-level design policy, sampling / transformation sensitivity, reliability window, and model recovery / family comparison are no longer left implicit.
  • It now also makes the thermodynamic stop line explicit at the front door: coarse-graining / timescale, observed-state closure / hidden-degree risk, reverse-transition support / finite-data handling, stability / nuisance sensitivity, cross-estimator concordance, and physiology-side grounding / bridge quality are no longer left implicit.
  • It now also includes the temporal-bridge stop line added in the 2026-03-30 sync, namely the split between fast state labels and slow internal milieu.
  • It now also includes the bridge-witness split used across the newer state-continuity pages, so same-subject / same-brain labels are no longer left sounding like one generic continuity proof.
  • It now also includes the maintenance-side route-card split needed after the late-March and early-April 2026 front-door passes, so intrinsic excitability and ionic / chloride language no longer stay collapsed into one generic hidden-state meter.
  • It now also makes the thermal stop line explicit at the front door: thermal route card, field-potential thermal confound, device-heating artifact, brain-state proxy route, and passive / task-linked versus perturbation-conditioned human thermal routes are no longer left implicit.
  • It now also fixes tractography-specific stop-line terms such as macro pathway prior and tractography route card, so living-human connectome language is not overread.
  • It now also includes the electrical-state stop-line terms needed after the 2026-04-03 human-clue split, such as shared extracellular / electrical state, human ECS proxy clue, and human perturbation-conditioned clue.
  • It is especially careful about pairs that sound similar but should not be collapsed, such as observability / identifiability / direct validation and functional connectivity / effective connectivity / causal wiring.
  • If a term blocks your reading, this page is meant to get you unstuck quickly and send you back to the main text.
Helpful next pages
Introduction to WBE Introduction to EEG FAQ
Best for
Readers who do not want to get stuck on terminology and anyone trying to avoid category mistakes
Reading time
3 to 10 minutes for only the necessary items
Accuracy note
The definitions here are deliberately short. For exact usage, return to the linked page sections or original papers.

Relatively clear at this stage

What we know now

  • Many misunderstandings can be avoided simply by reducing terminology confusion.
  • It is especially important to distinguish between decode/emulate, correlation/causation, functional connectivity/effective connectivity/causal wiring, observability/identifiability, model fit/direct validation, and brain signal/language prior.
  • Readers now also need term-level separation for hidden-state, shortcut-route, maintenance-state, post-transcriptional RNA-state, phospho-signaling / second-messenger state, glial substrate-routing, astrocyte-state, target-defined astrocyte-related proxy, clearance / immune support, macro clearance-transport proxy family, cargo-transport state, thermal-state, timing-state, vascular-state, proxy-class, route-role, route-maturity, and calibrator-role language.
  • For effective connectivity, candidate model space alone is still too coarse; observed-subsystem closure, node-definition policy, processing / first-level design policy, sampling / transformation sensitivity, model recovery, reliability window, and abstention each carry a different failure mode.
  • For thermodynamic language, estimator family alone is still too coarse; coarse-graining, hidden-degree risk, reverse-transition support, stability, cross-estimator concordance, physiology-side grounding, bridge quality, and abstention each carry a different failure mode.
  • Support-state proxy is still too coarse unless quantity type or route role is also named explicitly.
  • Readers also need a term-level split between fast state labels such as movement / arousal and slow internal milieu such as circadian phase, glucocorticoid exposure, and insulin / metabolic regime.
  • Readers also need a term-level split between same-subject / same-brain labels and the specific bridge witness being claimed, such as landmarks, latent manifolds, representational geometry, fingerprints, alignment rescue, or recalibration rescue.
  • Readers also need a term-level split between intrinsic-excitability route families such as allocation bias, AIS / ion-channel-state plasticity, homeostatic set point / recovery control, and bounded human proxy routes, because those do not constrain the same physiological object.
  • Readers also need a term-level split between ionic / chloride route families such as local chloride set point, E_GABA_A / inhibitory-driving-force regime, interstitial-ion state switching, and quantity-defined human sodium or CSF-ion proxies, because those do not raise the claim ceiling in the same way.
  • Readers also need a term-level split between thermal-state itself, field-potential thermal confounds, device-heating artifacts, brain-state proxy routes, and passive / task-linked versus perturbation-conditioned human thermal routes, because those do not raise the claim ceiling in the same way.
  • Readers also need a term-level stop line between connectome as structural scaffold and living-human tractography as an acquisition- and graph-conditioned macro pathway prior.
  • Readers now also need a term-level split between shared extracellular / electrical state itself, human diffusion-MRI ECS clues, and human perturbation-conditioned clues, because those do not raise the claim ceiling in the same way.
  • The newer route-card names are not decorative labels; they each name a distinct failure mode such as upstream visibility loss, cross-stack shared-driver risk, or broken state continuity across a sequential bridge.
  • This page serves as an entry point for short definitions and a way to return to the main text.

Still unresolved beyond this point

What we still do not know

  • Terms related to the theory of consciousness have slightly different meanings depending on the paper or position.
  • A short definition alone does not completely resolve the issues in research.

Learn the basics

Check the basics in the wiki

How To Use

This glossary is a quick reference for the meaning of terms. It starts with everyday-language explanations, moves to stricter definitions only when needed, and ties the discussion back to measurement, modeling, and verification.

How To Use This Page

There is no need to memorize every word. Check only the term that blocked you, get a rough sense of its meaning here, and then return to the original page.

When You Are Unsure Which Page To Return To

Even after checking the terminology, you may still be unsure whether to return next to Verification, Roadmap, WBE 101, or EEG 101. If you want the role differences among the public pages first, see Wiki: Guide to the public pages.

When You Want To Split Theory Pages From Practical Pages

If you want to return to theory-side pages such as WBE 101, Perspective, the framework section in Perspective, or Roadmap, use Wiki: Guide to the theory pages. If you want to return instead to practical pages such as Verification, Datasets, or the L0 practice section in Datasets, use Wiki: Guide to the practical pages.

How to find lost words by type

If you stop at these words First section to look at What you'll learn here
"Foundation words of this site" such as Mind-Upload, WBE, and the claim ladder Core concepts You can see the site's goals and how it grades claim strength.
Words that indicate "differences in what can be done," such as decode, emulate, and counterfactual Decode and Emulate You can see that translating observations and running internal dynamics are different claims.
Words from consciousness theory or consciousness metrics, such as IIT, GNWT, FEP, and PCI Theories of consciousness You can get a quick sense of what each theory or metric is trying to explain.
Measurement method terms such as EEG, MEG, fMRI, ECoG, QC Measurement You can check what each method measures and where it is strong or weak.
“Estimation and modeling” terms such as inverse problem, ESI, causality, and identifiability Modeling You can see why estimation from observations may fail to determine a unique answer.
"Research operations" terms such as BIDS, benchmark, reproducibility, and preregistration Standardization/Reproducibility You can see why operating rules are needed to create comparable progress.
Reading tips

When similar words appear next to each other, start by asking what each term directly observes, whether it supports a strong claim by itself, and whether it includes changed-condition or intervention responses. In particular, do not stretch a correlation claim directly into a claim about causation or identity.

When the theory names are lined up in a row and become difficult

The differences among IIT, GNWT, FEP, and PCI can be hard to keep straight from short definitions alone. In that case, start with Wiki: Consciousness theory map, get the table-level overview first, and then return here.

When measurement words and model words are mixed and become difficult

EEG, QC, BIDS, inverse problems, ESI, DCM, and SCM are not synonyms. If you want to see which terms belong to observation, organization, estimation, and verification, start with Wiki: Guide to terms from measurement to modeling.

When stuck at an inverse problem or causal model

There is a difference between "signals visible on the scalp," "what was actually happening in the brain," and "what counts as a causal explanation." If you want to organize that distinction through the forward problem, inverse problem, ESI, DCM, and SCM, start with Wiki: From observation to estimation.

When you get stuck due to the range of numbers or how to handle low reliability

Confidence intervals, credible intervals, uncertainty propagation, and abstention are all ways to avoid overreading a single number. If you want that organized from the beginning, see Wiki: Uncertainty, calibration, and abstention first.

When it stops due to the difference in the role of the measuring device

EEG, MEG, fMRI, ECoG, and MRI all measure the brain, but they do not provide the same kind of information. If you want to see what each modality contributes and why they are combined, start with Wiki: Basics of multimodal integration.

When You Get Stuck On Research-Operations Terms

Baselines, benchmarks, preregistration, model cards, and failure examples all matter for reproducibility, but they do different jobs. If you want to sort out those differences from the beginning, see Wiki: Baselines, preregistration, and model cards first.

When the new verification terms start to pile up

If words such as claim ceiling, hidden state, specificity / shortcut, maintenance-state, timing-state, or vascular-state / CVR audit start appearing faster than they can be digested, begin with Verification: Observability Budget and then return here. This glossary is meant to stop those terms from collapsing into one vague idea of “uncertainty.”

When human-evidence terms start sounding like one thing

Words such as proxy class, route maturity / model burden, route role, calibrator role, support-state proxy, glial substrate-routing, target-defined astrocyte-related proxy, and macro clearance-transport proxy family are there to stop local ultrastructure, SV2A PET, MRSI biochemical scaffold, dynamic DMRSI, myelin mapping, BBB water exchange, MAO-B / I2BS astrocyte PET, CSF mobility, respiration-conditioned net-flow MRI, exercise-conditioned contrast-influx, and model-based biomarker-efflux evidence from collapsing into one impression of “we can now see almost everything in humans.” If that distinction is what you need next, go to WBE 101: human observability ladder and Wiki: Observability and Claim Ceiling by Measurement Stack.

When astrocyte-state and glial fuel support start sounding identical

On this site, those are different terms. Glial substrate-routing is about who supplied which fuel or carrier to which neuronal sink under which regime. Astrocyte-state is about astrocyte network or ensemble state that can shape recall, stabilization, or fear-state representation. Current human energetic imaging or astrocyte-related PET does not directly identify living-human glia-to-neuron fuel-routing state. If that distinction is what you need next, go to WBE 101: hidden state at the entry point and Wiki: glial substrate-routing route card.

When excitability words start sounding like one thing

On this site, intrinsic excitability is not one generic hidden variable. Yiu et al. (2014) and Hadzibegovic et al. (2025) support allocation / engram-selection bias routes, Benoit et al. (2025) plus Grubb & Burrone (2010) support AIS / ion-channel-state routes, Hengen et al. (2016) supports firing-rate set-point / recovery-control routes, and Tallman et al. (2025) remains a human clinical-unit allocation-linked route with firing as an indirect excitability index. Those are different physiological loci and different observability ceilings. If that distinction is what you need next, go to WBE 101: hidden state at the entry point and Wiki: intrinsic excitability / homeostatic-set-point route card.

When ionic words start sounding like one thing

On this site, ionic / chloride evidence is not one interchangeable meter. Glykys et al. (2014) supports a local chloride-set-point route, Heubl et al. (2017) supports activity-dependent KCC2 regulation, Ding et al. (2016) supports interstitial-ion state switching, Byvaltsev et al. (2023) supports perisynaptic K+ clearance by reverse-mode KCC2, Lyckenvik et al. (2025) shows that human CSF ion ranges remain tightly regulated and distinct from serum, and Qian et al. (2025) shows that human sodium MRI still splits into mono-/bi-T2 signal routes rather than one routine ionic-state readout. If that distinction is what you need next, go to WBE 101: hidden state at the entry point and Wiki: ionic / chloride route card.

When thermal words start sounding like one thing

On this site, thermal-state is not one interchangeable meter. Hardingham & Larkman (1998) and Volgushev et al. (2000) support local operating-point physiology, Moser et al. (1993) supports a field-potential thermal confound, Long & Fee (2008) supports sequence-timing perturbation, Owen et al. (2019) and Boorman et al. (2023) support device- or preparation-linked heating / cooling burden, Lazopulo et al. (2025) supports a brain-state proxy route, and Rzechorzek et al. (2022), Rogala et al. (2024), Tan et al. (2025), Tan et al. (2024), plus Inoue et al. (2025) support different human thermal routes. Those are different inferential objects with different ceilings. If that distinction is what you need next, go to WBE 101: hidden state at the entry point and Wiki: thermal route card.

When the newer card names start piling up

If names such as field-formation wall, Fusion Card, Human Proxy Composition Card, shared-driver audit, strongest single row, or State-Continuity Bridge Card start appearing faster than they can be digested, use this glossary to keep the failure modes separate. These terms are not just site jargon: they mark different reasons why same-session, multimodal, same-subject, or proxy-rich still may fail to raise the claim ceiling.

When same-subject and same-brain start sounding like proof by themselves

On this site, those labels are not enough. Bosch et al. (2022) and MICrONS Consortium et al. (2025) support co-registered landmark-style bridges, Gallego et al. (2020) and Karpowicz et al. (2025) support latent-dynamics / alignment witnesses, Guntupalli et al. (2016) supports a representational-space witness, Van De Ville et al. (2021) shows that fingerprint evidence is time-scale dependent, and Wilson et al. (2025) shows that stable use can still depend on unsupervised recalibration. These are different carried objects, so this glossary now defines them separately instead of letting same-subject or same-brain stand in for one generic continuity guarantee.

When effective-connectivity words start sounding too close to discovered wiring

If terms such as effective-connectivity route card, observed-subsystem closure / latent-confound audit, node-definition policy, processing / first-level design policy, sampling / transformation sensitivity, reliability window, or model recovery / family comparison start appearing faster than they can be digested, that is a sign the site is trying to stop a real overread. On this site, a directed graph is not promoted beyond a model-conditioned causal hypothesis until those terms are disclosed. If that distinction is what you need next, go to Wiki: effective-connectivity route card, FAQ, and Verification: Observability Budget.

When thermodynamic words start sounding too close to measured cost

If terms such as Irreversibility / Thermodynamic Route Card, coarse-graining / timescale, observed-state closure / hidden-degree risk, reverse-transition support / finite-data handling, stability / nuisance sensitivity, cross-estimator concordance, or physiology-side grounding / bridge quality start appearing faster than they can be digested, that is a sign the site is trying to stop a real overread. On this site, an irreversibility result is not promoted beyond exploratory auxiliary evidence until those terms are disclosed. If that distinction is what you need next, go to Wiki: irreversibility route card, FAQ, and Verification: thermodynamic indicators.

When time-validity words start sounding too similar

If state annotation, state continuity, day-night context, and slow internal milieu start sounding like one thing, return to Wiki: state, trait, and drift and Wiki: State-Continuity Bridge. On this site, fast labels such as movement or arousal do not automatically cover circadian phase, glucocorticoid exposure, or insulin / metabolic regime.

Core concepts

Term Meaning of Mind-Upload (roughly)
Mind Upload A broad term for transferring mind-relevant function, memory, or consciousness-related claims into a digital substrate. In Mind-Upload, such claims are separated by the claim ladder.
WBE（Whole Brain Emulation） Reproducing brain-relevant function on a different substrate. What counts as "success" depends on the definition, so the evaluation criteria must be fixed first.
Claim stairs (L0-L5) A framework for aligning claim wording with actual achievement. It prevents L1 decoding claims from being confused with L4 identity claims.
Verification Commons A public-good layer of standards, data, evaluation, registration, and auditing that allows "comparable progress" to accumulate.

Decode and Emulate

Term Difference
Decoding Predict states, stimuli, sentences, etc. from observed signals (easily based on correlation).
Emulation Internal states evolve over time, respond to interventions, and generate future outputs (strong causal and generative demands).
Counterfactual Prediction for the branch "What if I change condition X?" The center of verification that fills the gap between decode and emulate.

Commonly confused words

Easy to confuse groups The difference in one word
Mind Upload / WBE Mind upload is a broad general term, and WBE is a technology-oriented way of reproducing brain functions on a different basis.
Decoding/Emulation Decoding translates observations into outputs, while emulation requires internal dynamics that continue to evolve and respond to intervention.
Correlation / Causation Correlation is a relationship that changes together, and causation is a relationship that changes when one changes the other.
Functional connectivity / effective connectivity / causal wiring Functional connectivity is statistical dependence, effective connectivity is a model-conditioned directed-influence claim, and causal wiring needs stronger intervention or external validation than either label alone.
Observability/Identifiability Observability asks whether states can be distinguished at all, while identifiability asks whether they can be uniquely determined. The first can hold without the second.
Model fitting/direct validation Model fitting means matching observed data, and direct validation means checking against external ground truth. The evidence is stronger for the latter.
Brain signals / language prior Brain signals are measurement-derived information, and language prior is statistical clues supplemented by vocabulary, context, and LLM. Output fluency alone cannot separate the contributions.
Benchmark/Leaderboard Benchmarks are tasks and indicators for comparison, and leaderboards are operational screens that list the results.

Verification and Hidden-State Terms

Term Meaning in Mind-Upload
Claim ceiling The strongest statement the current evidence is allowed to support. If key variables stay unobserved or unaudited, the claim stops at a lower level.
Hidden state / latent state A variable that still affects behavior or dynamics but is not directly observed by the current measurement stack. “Not measured” and “not important” are different claims.
Observability Budget A site rule that separates what entered the sensor from what still had to be inferred. It prevents “multimodal” or “higher resolution” from being misread as state-complete.
Macro pathway prior A tractography-derived human connectome or bundle estimate that constrains large-scale white-matter organization without becoming a synapse-resolved, direction-complete, or pipeline-invariant graph. Acquisition scheme, endpoint assignment, parcellation, filtering, and uncertainty handling can all change it.
Proxy class The kind of variable a route actually constrains, such as structural scaffold, synaptic-density proxy, biochemical scaffold, macro energetic proxy, or clearance proxy. It says what object is being measured, not which route role the paper plays or how mature the route is.
Route maturity / model burden A separate label for how specialized, small-cohort, hardware-limited, or model-dependent a route still is. It prevents a useful proxy from being misread as field-ready or routine just because the paper is technically strong.
Route role The specific job a paper plays inside one route family, such as first-in-human target validation, disease-context contrast, named quantification, whole-body biodistribution, challenge-linked release, or model-based biomarker efflux. It is different from proxy class, route maturity, and calibrator role, and it stops one family name from sounding like one interchangeable row.
Calibrator role The bounded hidden-state family a route can safely calibrate on this site. A route can be real and technically strong while still calibrating only one hidden-state family rather than a whole human internal state.
Human observability ladder A front-door rule that compares human measurement routes on three axes at once: proxy class, route maturity / model burden, and calibrator role. It stops “human evidence exists” from being compressed into “state-complete human measurement is close.”
Human Proxy Composition Card The disclosure rule for combining several living-human proxy rows. It asks what each row directly measures, whether the rows are truly same-subject / same-session / same-perturbation, whether the agreement survives a shared-driver audit, what the bundle adds beyond the strongest single row, and which hidden-state families still remain latent.
Shared-driver audit A check on whether apparent agreement across modalities or proxy rows could still be explained by a common nuisance source, such as arousal, autonomic physiology, global vascular fluctuations, or a shared preprocessing artifact, rather than by one uniquely identified biological target.
Strongest single row The best individual route in a proxy bundle under matched conditions. On this site, a bundle does not raise the claim ceiling merely by having more rows; it must show what it adds beyond the strongest single route already available.
Fusion Card The disclosure rule for multimodal or atlas-informed claims. It asks for acquisition relation, lag / synchronization audit, co-registration scope, fusion-model burden, shared-vs-specific component disclosure, external calibration, and abstention boundary before “multimodal” is read as stronger than the best unimodal route.
Tractography route card The disclosure rule for tractography-derived connectome claims. It asks for direct observable, acquisition / harmonization scheme, cortical-endpoint assignment, graph-construction choices, uncertainty quantification, external calibration, and abstention boundary before a diffusion-MRI graph is read beyond the macro-pathway-prior ceiling.
State-Continuity Bridge Card The disclosure rule for claims that bridge across live measurement, later fixation, ex vivo follow-up, or cross-day reacquisition. It asks for acquisition order, elapsed time, regime continuity including slow internal milieu, coordinate transfer, bridge validation, and residual drift ceiling before specimen linkage is promoted to one state sample.
Same-subject / same-brain label A label that says which specimen, participant, or brain is being linked across measurements. On this site it is a linkage statement, not yet a proof that the carried object stayed the same. The missing question is always what kind of bridge witness was preserved.
Same-state evidence Evidence that supports not only same subject or same brain, but also continuity of the relevant latent state across the bridge being claimed. It is stronger than specimen identity alone and usually requires an explicit bridge audit.
Bridge witness The specific type of evidence used to argue that something was carried across a bridge. On this site, anatomical landmarks, latent manifolds, representational geometry, fingerprint features, alignment rescue, and recalibration rescue are different bridge witnesses with different safe claim ceilings, so they should not be collapsed into one generic continuity proof.
Landmark / correspondence-point witness A bridge witness built from co-registration features such as matched landmarks, correspondence points, or specimen-linked coordinates. It can support specimen linkage and coordinate transfer, but by itself it does not prove that synaptic state, biochemical state, or other latent state stayed the same across the bridge.
Latent-manifold witness A bridge witness built from low-dimensional latent dynamics or manifold structure that remains usable across days or recording changes. It can support stable readout under an alignment step, but it is still different from direct proof that the underlying local biological state stayed fixed.
Representational-space / geometry witness A bridge witness built from preserved relations among population-response patterns, such as a shared representational space or reproducible representational geometry. It is stronger than loose pattern similarity, but it is still not automatically anatomical identity, same-state proof, or route-free continuity of all hidden variables.
Fingerprint witness A bridge witness built from subject-identifying neural patterns that support re-identification across recordings. On this site, fingerprint evidence is useful but narrower than same-state evidence, because it can depend strongly on time scale, modality, and task regime while leaving the carried latent variable ambiguous.
Alignment rescue A post hoc mapping that restores performance by aligning a new recording to a reference latent space, manifold, or decoder geometry. It supports a usable bridge under alignment, but it does not by itself prove that the raw signal, the sensor relation, or the biological state remained unchanged.
Recalibration rescue A bridge-maintenance strategy that restores performance by updating model parameters or adaptation state on later data. It supports operational recoverability under drift, not proof that the same carried object stayed valid without recalibration.
Slow internal milieu The hours-to-days body-state layer that includes circadian phase, recent sleep-wake schedule, glucocorticoid / steroid exposure, and feeding / insulin-metabolic regime. It can shift hippocampal plasticity, memory retrieval, or decoder-relevant neural state even when the visible fast sensory-motor loop looks unchanged. It should not be collapsed either into fast-loop state labels such as movement or arousal, or into the longer-horizon maintenance-state families.
Specificity & Shortcut Card An audit that asks whether a high score came from the intended neural variable or from nuisance routes such as movement, EMG, fingerprint, or acquisition setup.
Neural Contribution Card The speech / brain-to-text version of shortcut auditing. It separates brain-derived contribution from task structure, language priors, candidate sets, and feedback routes.
Subject / session fingerprint Person- or session-specific signal that can raise scores even when the target neural variable is weak. Cross-subject or cross-session claims need this separated explicitly.
Acquisition-distribution shortcut Performance that comes from site, device, reference system, electrode layout, impedance pattern, or protocol differences rather than from the intended biological target.
Vascular-state / CVR audit A measurement-side audit for hemodynamic modalities that asks whether baseline vascular state, cerebrovascular reactivity, or superficial/systemic contamination could explain the amplitude difference. It is different from maintenance-side neurovascular-unit / BBB / pericyte state.
Maintenance-state Slow controller and support variables, such as sleep / wake history, post-transcriptional RNA-state, phospho-signaling / second-messenger state, cargo-transport / cytoskeletal trafficking state, thermal-state, ionic state, bioenergetic / mitochondrial support, neurovascular-unit / BBB / pericyte state, glial substrate-routing, astrocyte-state, and clearance-related support, that matter for long-horizon stability. It is broader than fast loop state labels, but it is also different from the narrower slow internal milieu of circadian / glucocorticoid / insulin-metabolic regime disclosure.
Intrinsic excitability / homeostatic-set-point route card The disclosure rule that stops the word excitability from collapsing allocation bias, AIS / ion-channel-state plasticity, homeostatic recovery control, and bounded human proxy routes into one line. It asks which claim family, physiological locus, direct observable, time window, human evidence class, and abstention boundary are actually supported.
Allocation / engram-selection bias The route family about which neurons are preferentially recruited into a memory trace because their excitability or readiness is higher at encoding. It is different from AIS / ion-channel plasticity, firing-rate homeostasis, and human perturbation-conditioned proxy routes.
AIS / ion-channel-state route The route family about axon-initial-segment geometry, Na+-channel distribution, spike-initiation rules, and related excitability plasticity. It is different from allocation bias, which neurons were selected, and from long-horizon recovery control.
Homeostatic set point / recovery control The route family about where a neuron or circuit returns after perturbation, deprivation, or state change. It is different from a momentary firing-rate snapshot, from AIS microstructure, and from which neurons were allocated during learning.
Post-transcriptional RNA-state The layer between gene-level transcript abundance and protein outcome that includes alternative splicing, m6A-dependent translation / degradation, and ADAR-mediated RNA editing. It should not be collapsed into either static transcript counts or local proteostasis.
Phospho-signaling / second-messenger state The fast controller layer between protein presence and current pathway activity that includes phosphosite occupancy, kinase/phosphatase balance, and compartment-specific cAMP/Ca2+/PKA signaling nanodomains. It should not be collapsed into either transcript abundance, bulk proteomics, or nominal synaptic weight.
Glial substrate-routing The maintenance-side fuel-routing layer that asks which glial supplier delivered which substrate or carrier to which neuronal sink, under which regime and through which transport route. On this site, lactate-shuttle support, glial ketone-body routing under starvation, intensive-learning glia-to-neuron fatty-acid flux, and apoE / sortilin-dependent lipid delivery are different claim families rather than one generic glial-support row. Current living-human energetic imaging or astrocyte-related PET does not directly read out this routing state, so it should not be collapsed into astrocyte-state, neuronal mitochondrial control, or one generic human energetic proxy.
Astrocyte-state The minutes-to-days astrocyte network or ensemble state that can change recall, multiday stabilization, or fear-state representations through astrocyte-specific signaling and population dynamics. On this site, the human side does not directly read out astrocyte-state; it is carried only by target-defined astrocyte-related proxies. MAO-B first-in-human target validation, disease-context contrast, brain quantification / biodistribution, and I2BS routes are different route roles rather than one interchangeable astrocyte row. Astrocyte-state should not be collapsed into glial substrate-routing, generic metabolic background, or clearance / immune support.
Target-defined astrocyte-related proxy A living-human proxy family such as MAO-B or I2BS PET that constrains tracer-defined astrocyte-related signal rather than route-free astrocyte-state ground truth. Its safe reading still depends on route role: first-in-human target validation, disease-context contrast, named quantification, whole-body biodistribution, or cohort / covariate regime are different papers with different ceilings.
Neurovascular-unit / BBB / pericyte state The maintenance-side vascular support layer that includes capillary recruitment / tone, endothelial / pericyte barrier and transport regime, and BBB quantity types such as water exchange, tracer-specific transport, or leakage-related state that can change plasticity support and long-horizon stability. It should not be collapsed either into measurement-side vascular-state / CVR audit or into clearance / immune support.
Clearance / immune support The multiday support layer that includes drainage anatomy, microglia-related synaptic support, CSF-interstitial exchange, and related clearance routes that can change synaptic physiology, recovery, and protein-clearance claims. On the human side, the transport proxy family already splits into macroscopic CSF oscillation, parenchyma-CSF water exchange, respiration-conditioned net-flow, exercise-conditioned contrast influx / meningeal-lymphatic flow, intrathecal tracer / CSF-to-blood clearance, CSF mobility, and model-based biomarker efflux. It should not be collapsed either into astrocyte-state, into a generic glymphatic cleanup metaphor, or into direct local immune-controller identity.
Macro clearance-transport proxy family A living-human support-state proxy family that measures transport-side objects such as macroscopic CSF oscillation, parenchyma-CSF water exchange, respiration-conditioned net-flow, exercise-conditioned contrast influx / parasagittal meningeal-lymphatic flow, intrathecal tracer / CSF-to-blood clearance, CSF mobility, or model-based biomarker efflux. These rows differ by direct observable, crossed boundary, intervention regime, carrier / analyte class, and model burden, so they do not form one generic glymphatic meter or local immune-controller readout.
Support-state proxy A human route that constrains slow maintenance variables only at a coarse level. Its meaning still depends on quantity type or route role: energetic balance vs exchange flux vs NAD dynamics; quantity-defined ionic or myelin routes; BBB water-exchange vs tracer-specific transport; target-defined astrocyte-related proxies; or macro clearance-transport routes such as CSF mobility, net-flow, contrast-influx, intrathecal clearance, and model-based efflux. It is stronger than saying “nothing is visible,” but weaker than local controller, glial substrate-routing identity, astrocyte-ensemble state, cell-specific immune control, or other cell-specific ground truth.
Shared extracellular / electrical state The non-chemical coordination layer that includes gap-junction coupling, endogenous field effects, extracellular-space geometry / diffusion barriers / osmotic regime, and inhibitory-driving-force state. It should not be collapsed into the chemical connectome, into generic ionic state, or into one generic synchrony variable.
Human ECS proxy clue A bounded human diffusion-MRI clue that is compatible with changes in extra-axonal / extracellular volume or sleep-linked interstitial-fluid / glymphatic-like state, but is not a direct local readout of synapse-adjacent extracellular geometry. On this site, wakefulness-related diffusion clues and sleep-conditioned higher-order diffusion clues are different route classes rather than one interchangeable human ECS row.
Human perturbation-conditioned clue A human study in which a perturbation changes behavior or oscillation coupling in a way consistent with a hidden mechanism, while still not directly identifying which cells or local state variable changed. It is stronger than having no human evidence, but weaker than a direct local assay or route-free state identification.
Thermal-state The tissue operating-temperature condition that can change membrane kinetics, synaptic reliability, field-potential amplitude, and sequence timing. It is different from timing-state, bioenergetic-state, and thermodynamic / irreversibility metrics. Even on the human side, the safer routes still split into passive / task-linked macro thermometry and perturbation-conditioned thermal routes rather than one direct local thermal readout.
Thermal route card The disclosure rule that stops thermal evidence from collapsing local operating-point physiology, field-potential confounds, sequence / rhythm perturbation, device-heating artifact, brain-state proxy routes, and human passive / task-linked versus perturbation-conditioned thermal routes into one bucket. It asks for claim family, direct thermal observable, spatial / preparation regime, driver or perturbation route, time window, function target, human evidence class, and abstention boundary.
Field-potential thermal confound A route in which temperature shifts rescale or drift field-potential amplitude strongly enough to mimic or mask the effect being claimed. It is not evidence by itself that the intended cognitive, plasticity, or circuit variable changed.
Device- or preparation-linked heating artifact A local temperature change produced by the intervention or setup itself, such as optogenetic light delivery, probes, stimulation hardware, or cooling / warming apparatus. It can distort neural or neurovascular readouts and therefore must not be silently read as the target mechanism.
Brain-state proxy route A route in which brain temperature covaries with sleep / wake state or oscillatory regime and therefore acts as a coarse state marker. It is stronger than having no state-linked thermal evidence, but weaker than a direct readout of cell-specific microtemperature, synapse-specific heating burden, or local thermal-controller identity.
Human passive / task-linked macro thermometry A living-human route such as MRS thermometry or task-linked thermal mapping that constrains coarse regional brain temperature or task-evoked temperature change. It remains a bounded macro thermal proxy rather than cell-specific microtemperature or local heating-burden ground truth.
Human perturbation-conditioned thermal route A living-human route in which systemic heat exposure or focal cooling changes function or neurovascular readout under a declared thermal perturbation. It can show temperature sensitivity under intervention, but it is still not a direct readout of cell-specific thermal-state or local thermal-controller identity.
Timing-state Biological conduction-timing variables such as myelin, node / internode geometry, periaxonal coupling, and related support state. It is different from hardware latency. When living-human proxy routes are used here, tract-scale transmission-speed estimation is treated as a separate timing-support route, and myelin-water, MT-family, bilayer, qT1-remyelination-sensitive, and T1w/FLAIR tissue-health-sensitive routes are treated as different quantity types rather than one direct timing readout.
Cargo-transport / cytoskeletal trafficking state The branch-, spine-, or bouton-specific delivery and retention of receptors, endosomes, RNA cargoes, organelles, and presynaptic components. It is different from both local proteostasis and bioenergetic-state.
Ionic / chloride route card The disclosure rule that stops ionic state from collapsing local chloride set point, KCC2 / NKCC1 regulation, interstitial-ion state shifts, perisynaptic K+ clearance, pathology routes, and quantity-defined human sodium proxies into one meter. It asks for claim family, direct ionic observable, spatial regime, controller or perturbation route, human quantity type or compartment model, and abstention boundary.
Local chloride set point The locally established chloride concentration that helps determine whether GABAA input is more hyperpolarizing or less hyperpolarizing / depolarizing. It is different from bulk sodium MRI, generic excitability, or one whole-brain ionic scalar.
EGABA_A / inhibitory-driving-force regime The effective reversal-potential / driving-force context that helps decide how inhibitory input acts in the local circuit. It depends on chloride handling and local ionic conditions, so it should not be collapsed into synaptic weight, cell type, or one generic E/I-balance label.
Interstitial-ion state switching The route family in which extracellular K+, Ca2+, Mg2+, H+, or CSF-adjacent ion composition shifts the network's operating regime, such as sleep-wake state, gain, or synchrony. It is different from local chloride set point and from quantity-defined human sodium proxies.
Quantity-defined human sodium / ionic proxy family The living-human route family that measures explicitly defined ionic quantities such as tissue-sodium concentration, SQ+TQF-derived compartment fractions, mono-/bi-T2 sodium components, or CSF ion profiles. These routes are real but non-equivalent. They do not automatically yield cell-specific chloride concentration, local EGABA_A, or routine whole-brain intra- versus extracellular partition ground truth.

Theories of Consciousness

Term Meaning in Mind-Upload
IIT (Integrated Information Theory) A theory that measures consciousness by the amount of integrated information (Φ). IIT 4.0 (Albantakis et al., 2023) revamps the axiomatic system and specifies consciousness using a Φ structure (cause-effect structure). In WBE, this is directly linked to the preservation requirement of causal structure.
GNWT (Global Neural Workspace Theory) The theory that consciousness is established when information is "ignited" in the frontal-parietal network and shared over a wide area. The experimental conflict with IIT was verified by Cogitate Consortium (2025).
FEP (Free Energy Principle) A comprehensive framework in which living things minimize the "surprise" of sensory input in order to maintain boundaries with the environment (Friston, 2010). WBE uses this as the implementation principle.
Active Inference Behavioral aspects of FEP. Minimize prediction errors by actively changing the environment. Foundations of emulator autonomy.
PCI/PCI-ST (Perturbation Complexity Index) A metric that quantifies the complexity of the EEG response to TMS perturbation. In Mind-Upload it is treated as a theory-light empirical indicator, not as a final answer to consciousness.
Markov Blanket Statistical boundaries between system and environment. Although it is used to define the “self” in FEP, its application to the boundaries of consciousness has been criticized (Bruineberg et al., 2022).
Unfolding Argument The criticism is that any recurrent network can be replaced by a functionally equivalent feedforward network, and Φ=0 in IIT (Doerig et al., 2019). Arguments supporting the need to preserve causal structure in WBE.
HOT (Higher Order Theory) A group of theories that posit that consciousness is established by higher-order representations (``I know what I am perceiving'') relative to primary representations.

Measurement

Term Memo
EEG Measures the potential difference on the scalp with high temporal resolution. Spatial resolution is weak, so handling uncertainty is important.
MEG Measures magnetic fields. It complements EEG because the sensitivity profile is different, but the equipment is costly.
fMRI Measures blood-flow-related BOLD signals. Spatial resolution is relatively strong, but the signal is hemodynamic rather than direct electrical activity, so vascular-state / CVR limits still matter.
fNIRS Measures near-infrared changes in oxy- and deoxy-hemoglobin in superficial cortex. It is portable, but short-separation and systemic-confound control are critical.
ECoG / Invasive measurement While there is potential for causal intervention and high SNR, there are significant restrictions in ethics and scope of application.
QC（Quality Control） Quantifies impedance, noise, defects, artifacts, and related conditions, then records them in a log.

Implementation

Term Meaning in Mind-Upload
Neuromorphic hardware Specialized chips (Intel Loihi 2, SpiNNaker 2, etc.) that imitate the dynamics of biological neurons using electronic circuits. A candidate for meeting IIT's causal structure requirements.
Slow Continuous Mind Uploading A migration strategy that integrates the biological brain and digital infrastructure in stages, rather than a blanket copy (Clowes, 2021). An engineering approach to preserving identity.
Connectome Complete map of neural connections in the brain. In Mind-Upload it counts as structural scaffold evidence, not as state-complete reconstruction, because excitability, timing-state, transcription/chromatin, proteostasis, ECM, ionic state, and maintenance support remain separate variables. If the route is living-human diffusion-MRI tractography, the safe reading is lower still: it becomes an acquisition- and graph-conditioned macro pathway prior unless stronger calibration is named explicitly.
Human tractography connectome A living-human diffusion-MRI-derived connectome estimate. It can support major-bundle hypotheses, parcel-level pathway likelihoods, or calibrated bundle comparisons, but it is still conditioned by q-space sampling, endpoint policy, parcellation, filtering, and uncertainty modeling rather than functioning as one stable edge-complete graph.
NMM（Neural Mass Model） A model that describes the average activity of a large neuronal population. It underlies DCM and is often used to estimate E/I balance.
E/I balance (excitation/inhibition balance) Dynamic balance between excitability and inhibition in neural circuits. Involves changes in the quality and level of consciousness.

Modeling

Term How to use Mind-Upload
Field-formation wall The upstream visibility limit that decides whether a source class can reach the sensors at all with usable signal. Source extent, orientation, folding, cancellation, and tissue conductivities matter here, so this wall comes before the inverse solver.
Inverse Problem The problem of estimating causes such as brain activity from observations such as scalp EEG. In general, the solution is not unique.
Observability Asks whether different latent states can be distinguished from the chosen observations. What is visible and what is uniquely knowable are different questions.
Identifiability Asks whether different internal models or states could explain the same observation. High prediction accuracy does not guarantee a unique explanation.
ESI（EEG Source Imaging） Solves the inverse problem to estimate brain sources. The important point is to report not only the estimate itself but also its uncertainty.
Direct Validation Compares an estimated source or model output against intracranial stimulation, SEEG, or other external ground truth. A good fit alone is not a substitute.
Language Prior Statistical prior information that the decoder borrows from vocabulary, context, and LLM. While it can smooth out sentences, it also obscures the contribution of brain-derived information.
Calibration For example, a prediction with 80% confidence is true about 80% of the time over the long term. This is the task of aligning the size and correctness of the scores. In language decoding, however, the statement remains conditional on the declared candidate set, onset rule, or prompt scaffold unless a broader output space was explicitly audited.
Abstention / Reject Option An operation that returns "I don't know" under low confidence, extrapolation, or outlier conditions. It trades coverage against risk to avoid overclaiming.
Functional connectivity Statistical dependence among recorded signals or inferred sources. It can be useful, but it is not automatically leak-proof, directional, or causal.
Effective connectivity A model-conditioned claim about directed influence among named nodes. It is stronger than undirected dependence, but candidate model space alone is not enough: observed-subsystem closure / latent-confound audit, node-definition policy, processing / first-level design policy, sampling / transformation sensitivity, validation, reliability window, and abstention still shape the safe claim ceiling.
Effective-connectivity route card The disclosure rule for directed-graph claims. It asks for candidate model space, observed-subsystem closure / latent-confound audit, node-definition policy, processing / first-level design policy, sampling / transformation sensitivity, family comparison or model recovery, held-out perturbation / external validation, reliability window, and abstention boundary before a graph is read as more than a model-conditioned causal hypothesis.
Observed-subsystem closure / latent-confound audit A check on whether the recorded nodes and declared inputs are enough for the causal claim being made, or whether hidden nodes, common drives, or unknown inputs could still generate the same directed pattern. It stops a graph fit from being overread as if the observed subsystem were automatically closed.
Node-definition policy The rule for how graph nodes were chosen and represented, such as atlas parcels, functionally localized ROIs, source-space regions, or latent-state variables. Because directed estimates can move when node boundaries or functional accuracy change, this policy is part of the claim rather than an implementation detail.
Processing / first-level design policy The declared preprocessing and first-level modeling choices that shape the input to the effective-connectivity estimator, such as GLM design, activation contrast, nuisance regression, filtering, deconvolution, or ROI-extraction policy. On this site, those choices are not silent defaults because reasonable processing changes can materially alter connectivity strength and parameter certainty.
Sampling / transformation sensitivity The audit of how much the directed result depends on sampling rate, hemodynamic transform, temporal aggregation, source leakage handling, or other observation-model transformations. It is there because a plausible graph under one sampling / transformation regime may fail or reverse under another.
Model recovery / family comparison The check on whether the estimation workflow can recover the intended model family, or at least distinguish it from named alternatives, under matched simulation or held-out conditions. This is stronger than reporting only a winning model score inside one declared family.
Reliability window The acquisition regime over which an effective-connectivity estimate remains stable enough to support reuse, such as tightly matched task conditions, scan duration, hardware setup, and session interval. Reliability is therefore not a route-free property of the method alone.
wPLI A phase-lag metric designed to reduce sensitivity to some zero-lag mixing and noise. It is safer than some older phase-synchrony measures, but not a leak-proof inter-areal coupling readout.
STE (Symbolic Transfer Entropy) A directional-dependence estimator based on temporal information flow. In Mind-Upload it is not treated as causal proof without perturbation or external validation.
DCM A dynamic-causal-modeling framework that compares explicit generative circuit models. On this site it remains a route-card claim: larger model spaces, faster solvers, or whole-brain variants can improve tractability, but they do not remove the need to disclose node definition, processing policy, observed-subsystem closure, validation, reliability window, and abstention before any stronger causal-wiring language is allowed.
SCM (Structural Causal Model) A model that clearly shows causal relationships. Easy to define counterfactuals and intervention predictions.

Thermodynamics and cost

Term Meaning in Mind-Upload
Landauer lower bound The minimum dissipation lower bound for logically irreversible operations such as bit erasure. It is not a direct estimate of whole-brain wall power or WBE implementation cost.
Energy budget A descriptive breakdown of how biological tissue spends energy. It helps compare cost components, but it is not by itself a pass/fail KPI for emulation.
NESS (nonequilibrium steady state) A state that stays statistically stable only while energy continues to flow through the system. It is a concept for ongoing maintenance, not proof of identity or consciousness.
Irreversibility / EPR proxy A family of estimates derived from time asymmetry or entropy-production logic. In Mind-Upload, this is not one common measurement object: lower-bound estimates, asymmetry scores, visibility-graph indices, and model-based entropy-flow estimates are kept separate, and even a named estimator family still does not fix coarse-graining, hidden-degree risk, or operational stability.
Irreversibility / Thermodynamic Route Card The disclosure rule for reporting thermodynamic-style claims: state the signal route and state definition, coarse-graining / timescale, observed-state closure / hidden-degree risk, estimator family and quantity type, null / surrogate control, reverse-transition support / finite-data handling, stability / nuisance sensitivity, physiology-side grounding / bridge quality if energetic language is used, cost isolation, and abstention boundary before the claim ceiling is raised.
Coarse-graining / timescale The state-space construction behind the estimate: parcelization or clustering rule, retained features, temporal bins, sampling rate, and analysis window. Changing these choices can change what quantity was actually computed.
Observed-state closure / hidden-degree risk The risk that hidden variables, hidden cycles, or memory introduced by coarse graining still carry dissipation that the reported trajectory does not see. A small irreversibility number is not automatically near-equilibrium.
Reverse-transition support / finite-data handling Whether the relevant forward and reverse transitions were actually observed often enough, and how zero or rare counts were handled. A clean shuffle or surrogate is not the same thing as adequate support coverage.
Stability / nuisance sensitivity Whether the result survives motion, denoising, protocol changes, and test-retest checks. A mathematically interesting metric is not automatically a reusable operational signal.
Cross-estimator concordance Whether the sign or ordering survives more than one reasonable estimator family or state-space construction, rather than remaining an estimator-specific artifact.
Physiology-side grounding / bridge quality Whether metabolism or energetic cost was directly measured and aligned in the same session / state window, and whether agreement or disagreement across modalities was quantified. Paired modalities alone do not make a signal-side irreversibility measure a direct metabolic readout.
Supplementary information for 2026-03

Although non-invasive decoding and ESI are making steady progress, a successful decoder does not necessarily mean that the internal state can be uniquely restored, and a BOLD / fNIRS difference does not automatically mean a clean neural difference. When reading Tang et al. (2023), d'Ascoli et al. (2025), Unnwongse et al. (2023), and Hao et al. (2025), keep task constraints, shortcut routes, language prior, direct validation, and vascular-state limits separate.

Thermodynamic words also need a claim ceiling

Bérut et al. (2012), Attwell & Laughlin (2001), Lynn et al. (2021), de la Fuente et al. (2023), Nartallo-Kaluarachchi et al. (2025), and Ishihara & Shimazaki (2025) do not all compute the same quantity. Martínez et al. (2019) and Blom et al. (2024) show that partial observation or coarse lumping can hide dissipation and induce memory, Baiesi et al. (2024) show that sparse reverse transitions can force lower-bound strategies, Poudel et al. (2024) and Metzen et al. (2024) show that operational stability depends on metric family and nuisance handling, and Chen et al. (2025) plus Epp et al. (2025) show that temporal coupling or BOLD change is not automatic energetic grounding. In Mind-Upload, a thermodynamic result therefore does not automatically mean measured physical dissipation, reusable operational metric, matched metabolism-side evidence, wall-power, or a WBE gate.

Standardization and reproducibility (Open Science)

Term Meaning
BIDS / EEG-BIDS Rules for organizing neural measurement data. Their role is to lower the barrier to sharing and reproduction.
Benchmark A mechanism for fixing tasks, data, and metrics so results can be compared.
Baseline Starting point for comparison. If you want to claim improvement, you need a difference from the baseline.
Preregistration Fixes the plan before running the work and separates exploration from verification. This helps reduce reporting bias.
Model card A format that publishes not only scores but also training data, compute requirements, shortcut risks, claim ceiling, known weaknesses, and failure examples.

References (term definitions)

  1. Michel, C. M., & Brunet, D. (2019). EEG source imaging review. doi:10.3389/fneur.2019.00325
  2. Wipf, D., & Nagarajan, S. (2009). Unified Bayesian framework for MEG/EEG source imaging. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.02.059
  3. Seeber, M., Cantonas, L.-M., Hoevels, M., et al. (2019). Subcortical electrophysiological activity is detectable with high-density EEG source imaging. doi:10.1038/s41467-019-08725-w
  4. Unnwongse, K., Achakulvisut, T., Wu, J. Y., et al. (2023). Validating EEG source imaging using intracranial electrical stimulation in focal epilepsy. doi:10.1093/braincomms/fcad023
  5. Hao, S., Zhao, H., Feng, Z., et al. (2025). HD-EEG source imaging with simultaneous SEEG recording in drug-resistant epilepsy. doi:10.1111/epi.18552
  6. Tang, J., LeBel, A., Jain, S., & Huth, A. G. (2023). Semantic reconstruction of continuous language from non-invasive brain recordings. doi:10.1038/s41593-023-01304-9
  7. d'Ascoli, S., Bel, C., Rapin, J., et al. (2025). Towards decoding individual words from non-invasive brain recordings. doi:10.1038/s41467-025-65499-0
  8. Friston, K. J., Harrison, L., & Penny, W. (2003). Dynamic causal modelling. doi:10.1016/S1053-8119(03)00202-7
  9. Penny, W. D., Stephan, K. E., Mechelli, A., & Friston, K. J. (2004). Comparing dynamic causal models. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2004.03.026
  10. Rosa, M. J., Friston, K., & Penny, W. (2012). Post-hoc selection of dynamic causal models. doi:10.1016/j.jneumeth.2012.04.013
  11. Vinck, M., et al. (2011). Weighted Phase Lag Index (wPLI). doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.01.055
  12. Staniek, M., & Lehnertz, K. (2008). Symbolic Transfer Entropy. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.100.158101
  13. Haufe, S., Nikulin, V. V., Müller, K.-R., & Nolte, G. (2013). A critical assessment of connectivity measures for EEG data: A simulation study. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.09.036
  14. Palva, J. M., Wang, S. H., Palva, S., Zhigalov, A., Monto, S., Brookes, M. J., Schoffelen, J.-M., & Jerbi, K. (2018). Ghost interactions in MEG/EEG source space: A note of caution on inter-areal coupling measures. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2018.02.032
  15. Ye, S., Kitajo, K., & Kitano, K. (2020). Information-theoretic approach to detect directional information flow in EEG signals induced by TMS. doi:10.1016/j.neures.2019.09.003
  16. Miljevic, A., Murphy, O. W., Fitzgerald, P. B., & Bailey, N. W. (2025). Estimating sensor-space EEG connectivity PART 1: Identifying best performing methods for functional connectivity in simulated data. doi:10.1016/j.clinph.2025.03.043
  17. Gorgolewski, K. J., et al. (2016). BIDS. doi:10.1038/sdata.2016.44
  18. Pernet, C. R., et al. (2019). EEG-BIDS. doi:10.1038/s41597-019-0104-8
  19. Pernet, C. R., et al. (2020). Best practices in data analysis and sharing in neuroimaging using MEEG. doi:10.1038/s41593-020-00709-0
  20. Guo, C., Pleiss, G., Sun, Y., & Weinberger, K. Q. (2017). On Calibration of Modern Neural Networks. PMLR 70:1321-1330
  21. Geifman, Y., & El-Yaniv, R. (2017). Selective Classification for Deep Neural Networks. NeurIPS 2017
  22. Gouwens, N. W., et al. (2021). Integrated morphoelectric and transcriptomic classification of cortical GABAergic cells. doi:10.1038/s41586-020-2907-3
  23. Yiu, A. P., Mercaldo, V., Yan, C., et al. (2014). Neurons Are Recruited to a Memory Trace Based on Relative Neuronal Excitability Immediately before Training. doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2014.07.017
  24. Hadzibegovic, S., Zhu, L., Ginger, M., et al. (2025). Early intrinsic excitability plasticity of neocortical engram neurons defines memory formation and precision. doi:10.1038/s41467-025-66975-3
  25. Benoit, R., Galego, D. A., Schären, M. S., et al. (2025). Axon initial segment dynamics during associative fear learning. doi:10.1038/s41593-025-02152-5
  26. Hengen, K. B., Torrado Pacheco, A., McGregor, J. N., Van Hooser, S. D., & Turrigiano, G. G. (2016). Neuronal firing rate homeostasis is inhibited by sleep and promoted by wake. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2016.01.046
  27. Grubb, M. S., & Burrone, J. (2010). Activity-dependent relocation of the axon initial segment fine-tunes neuronal excitability. doi:10.1038/nature09160
  28. Tallman, C. W., Steinmetz, P. N., & Wixted, J. T. (2025). Neuronal allocation and sparse coding of episodic memories in the human hippocampus. doi:10.1038/s41598-025-21967-7
  29. Santoni, G., et al. (2024). Chromatin plasticity predetermines neuronal eligibility for memory trace formation. doi:10.1126/science.adg9982
  30. Wang, J., Telese, F., Tan, Y., et al. (2015). LSD1n is an H4K20 demethylase regulating memory formation via transcriptional elongation control. doi:10.1038/nn.4069
  31. Dai, J., Aoto, J., & Südhof, T. C. (2019). Alternative splicing of presynaptic neurexins differentially controls postsynaptic NMDA and AMPA receptor responses. doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2019.03.032
  32. Shi, H., Zhang, X., Weng, Y.-L., et al. (2018). m6A facilitates hippocampus-dependent learning and memory through YTHDF1. doi:10.1038/s41586-018-0666-1
  33. Peterson, L. N., Kasper, J. M., Allgaier, J. A., et al. (2025). ADAR2-mediated Q/R editing of GluA2 in homeostatic synaptic plasticity. doi:10.1126/scisignal.adr1442
  34. Joglekar, A., Prjibelski, A., Mahfouz, A., et al. (2024). Single-cell long-read sequencing-based mapping reveals specialized splicing patterns in developing and adult mouse and human brain. doi:10.1038/s41593-024-01616-4
  35. Li, Y., Zhu, M., Li, X., et al. (2025). Enhanced Protein Synthesis and Hippocampus-Dependent Memory via Inhibition of YTHDF2-Mediated m6A mRNA Degradation. doi:10.1002/advs.202514926
  36. Giese, K. P., Fedorov, N. B., Filipkowski, R. K., & Silva, A. J. (1998). Autophosphorylation at Thr286 of the alpha calcium-calmodulin kinase II in LTP and learning. doi:10.1126/science.279.5352.870
  37. Lee, H.-K., Barbarosie, M., Kameyama, K., Bear, M. F., & Huganir, R. L. (2003). Regulation of distinct AMPA receptor phosphorylation sites during bidirectional synaptic plasticity. doi:10.1016/S0092-8674(03)00122-3
  38. Tomita, S., Stein, V., Stocker, T. J., Nicoll, R. A., & Bredt, D. S. (2005). Bidirectional synaptic plasticity regulated by phosphorylation of stargazin-like TARPs. doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2005.01.009
  39. Vierra, N. C., et al. (2023). Endoplasmic reticulum-plasma membrane junctions couple electrical activity to Ca2+-activated PKA signaling in neurons. doi:10.1038/s41467-023-40930-6
  40. Biswas, D., et al. (2023). The landscape of the human brain phosphoproteome reveals region-specific phosphorylation events. doi:10.1021/acs.jproteome.2c00244
  41. Govindarajan, A., Israely, I., Huang, S.-Y., & Tonegawa, S. (2011). The dendritic branch is the preferred integrative unit for protein synthesis-dependent LTP. doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2010.12.008
  42. Glykys, J., Dzhala, V., Egawa, K., et al. (2014). Local impermeant anions establish the neuronal chloride concentration. doi:10.1126/science.1245423
  43. Heubl, M., Zhang, J., Pressey, J. C., et al. (2017). GABAA receptor dependent synaptic inhibition rapidly tunes KCC2 activity via the Cl-sensitive WNK1 kinase. doi:10.1038/s41467-017-01749-0
  44. Ding, F., O'Donnell, J., Xu, Q., et al. (2016). Changes in the composition of brain interstitial ions control the sleep-wake cycle. doi:10.1126/science.aad4821
  45. Byvaltsev, E., Behbood, M., Schleimer, J.-H., Gensch, T., Semyanov, A., Schreiber, S., & Strauss, U. (2023). KCC2 reverse mode helps to clear postsynaptically released potassium at glutamatergic synapses. doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2023.112934
  46. Lyckenvik, T., Forsberg, M., Johansson, K., et al. (2025). Ion concentrations in CSF and serum are differentially and precisely regulated. doi:10.1093/braincomms/fcaf201
  47. Qian, Y., Lin, Y.-C., Chen, X., et al. (2025). Single-quantum sodium MRI at 3 T for separation of mono- and bi-T2 sodium signals. doi:10.1038/s41598-025-07800-1
  48. Hardingham, N. R., & Larkman, A. U. (1998). The reliability of excitatory synaptic transmission in slices of rat visual cortex in vitro is temperature dependent. doi:10.1111/j.1469-7793.1998.249bu.x
  49. Volgushev, M., Vidyasagar, T. R., Chistiakova, M., Yousef, T., & Eysel, U. T. (2000). Membrane properties and spike generation in rat visual cortical cells during reversible cooling. doi:10.1111/j.1469-7793.2000.00059.x
  50. Moser, E., Mathiesen, I., & Andersen, P. (1993). Association between brain temperature and dentate field potentials in exploring and swimming rats. doi:10.1126/science.8446900
  51. Long, M. A., & Fee, M. S. (2008). Using temperature to analyse temporal dynamics in the songbird motor pathway. doi:10.1038/nature07448
  52. Owen, S. F., Liu, M. H., & Kreitzer, A. C. (2019). Thermal constraints on in vivo optogenetic manipulations. doi:10.1038/s41593-019-0422-3
  53. Boorman, L. W., Harris, S. S., Shabir, O., et al. (2023). Bidirectional alterations in brain temperature profoundly modulate spatiotemporal neurovascular responses in-vivo. doi:10.1038/s42003-023-04542-6
  54. Rzechorzek, N. M., Thrippleton, M. J., Chappell, F. M., et al. (2022). A daily temperature rhythm in the human brain predicts survival after brain injury. doi:10.1093/brain/awab466
  55. Rogala, J., Dreszer, J., Sińczuk, M., et al. (2024). Local variation in brain temperature explains gender-specificity of working memory performance. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2024.1398034
  56. Tan, X. R., Stephenson, M. C., Alhadad, S., et al. (2024). Elevated brain temperature under severe heat exposure impairs cortical motor activity and executive function. doi:10.1016/j.jshs.2023.09.001
  57. Tan, Y., Liu, W., Li, Y., et al. (2025). Measurement of Healthy Adult Brain Temperature Using 1H Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy Thermometry. doi:10.1007/s00062-024-01467-3
  58. Inoue, T., Nomura, S., Yamakawa, T., et al. (2025). Intraoperative evaluation using a multimodality probe of temperature-dependent neurovascular modulation during focal brain cooling. doi:10.1016/j.clinph.2025.02.262
  59. Lazopulo, A., Emmenegger, Y., Đukanović, N., et al. (2025). Brain temperature as proxy for brain state and oscillatory activity in the mouse. doi:10.1038/s41598-025-21175-3
  60. Seidl, A. H., Rubel, E. W., & Barria, A. (2015). Tuning of Ranvier node and internode properties in myelinated axons to adjust action potential timing. doi:10.1038/ncomms9073
  61. Suzuki, A., et al. (2011). Astrocyte-neuron lactate transport is required for long-term memory formation. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2011.02.018
  62. Silva, B., et al. (2022). Glial ketogenesis regulates memory maintenance during starvation. doi:10.1038/s42255-022-00528-6
  63. Pavlowsky, A., et al. (2025). Neuronal fatty acid oxidation fuels memory after intensive learning in Drosophila. doi:10.1038/s42255-025-01416-5
  64. Greda, A. K., et al. (2025). Interaction of sortilin with apolipoprotein E3 enables neurons to use long-chain fatty acids as alternative metabolic fuel. doi:10.1038/s42255-025-01389-5
  65. Cahill, M. K., et al. (2024). Network-level encoding of local neurotransmitters in cortical astrocytes. doi:10.1038/s41586-024-07311-5
  66. Williamson, N. R., et al. (2025). Learning-associated astrocyte ensembles regulate memory recall. doi:10.1038/s41586-024-08170-w
  67. Dewa, K., et al. (2025). The astrocytic ensemble acts as a multiday trace to stabilize memory. doi:10.1038/s41586-025-09619-2
  68. Bukalo, O., et al. (2026). Astrocytes enable amygdala neural representations supporting memory. doi:10.1038/s41586-025-10068-0
  69. Villemagne, V. L., Harada, R., Dore, V., et al. (2022). First-in-Humans Evaluation of 18F-SMBT-1, a Novel 18F-Labeled Monoamine Oxidase-B PET Tracer for Imaging Reactive Astrogliosis. doi:10.2967/jnumed.121.263254
  70. Hiraoka, K., Mesfin, B., Wu, Y., et al. (2025). Kinetic and quantitative analysis of [18F]SMBT-1 PET imaging for monoamine oxidase B. doi:10.1007/s12149-025-02083-y
  71. Mesfin, B., Ishioka, Y., Ichinose, Y., et al. (2026). Whole-body biodistribution of [18F]SMBT-1: a novel PET tracer for monoamine oxidase B imaging in healthy humans. doi:10.1007/s12149-025-02144-2
  72. Tyacke, R. J., Myers, J. F. M., Venkataraman, A., et al. (2018). Evaluation of 11C-BU99008, a PET Ligand for the Imidazoline2 Binding Site in Human Brain. doi:10.2967/jnumed.118.208009
  73. Livingston, N. R., Calsolaro, V., Hinz, R., et al. (2022). Relationship between astrocyte reactivity, using novel 11C-BU99008 PET, and glucose metabolism, grey matter volume and amyloid load in cognitively impaired individuals. doi:10.1038/s41380-021-01429-y
  74. Best, L. M., Truong, J., McCluskey, T., et al. (2026). MAO-B status in alcohol use disorder: a [11C]SL25.1188 PET imaging study of putative astrogliosis. doi:10.1038/s41380-025-03355-9
  75. Musall, S., Kaufman, M. T., Juavinett, A. L., Gluf, S., & Churchland, A. K. (2019). Single-trial neural dynamics are dominated by richly varied movements. doi:10.1038/s41593-019-0502-4
  76. Chaibub Neto, E., Pratap, A., Perumal, T. M., et al. (2019). Identity confounding in machine learning can be controlled by design. doi:10.1038/s41746-019-0178-x
  77. Murphy, K., Harris, A. D., & Wise, R. G. (2011). Robustly measuring vascular reactivity differences with breath-hold: normalising stimulus-evoked and resting state BOLD fMRI data. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.07.059
  78. Williams, R. J., Specht, J. L., Mazerolle, E. L., et al. (2023). Correspondence between BOLD fMRI task response and cerebrovascular reactivity across the cerebral cortex. doi:10.3389/fphys.2023.1167148
  79. Yücel, M. A., Selb, J., Huppert, T. J., Franceschini, M. A., & Boas, D. A. (2015). Short separation regression improves statistical significance and better localizes the hemodynamic response obtained by near-infrared spectroscopy for tasks with differing autonomic responses. doi:10.1117/1.NPh.2.3.035005
  80. Ahlfors, S. P., Han, J., Belliveau, J. W., & Hämäläinen, M. S. (2010). Sensitivity of MEG and EEG to source orientation. doi:10.1007/s10548-010-0154-x
  81. Goldenholz, D. M., Ahlfors, S. P., Hämäläinen, M. S., Sharon, D., Ishitobi, M., Vaina, L. M., & Stufflebeam, S. M. (2009). Mapping the signal-to-noise-ratios of cortical sources in magnetoencephalography and electroencephalography. doi:10.1002/hbm.20571
  82. Piastra, M. C., Nüßing, A., Vorwerk, J., Clerc, M., Engwer, C., & Wolters, C. H. (2021). A comprehensive study on electroencephalography and magnetoencephalography sensitivity to cortical and subcortical sources. doi:10.1002/hbm.25272
  83. Thomas, C., Ye, F. Q., Irfanoglu, M. O., Modi, P., Saleem, K. S., Leopold, D. A., & Pierpaoli, C. (2014). Anatomical accuracy of brain connections derived from diffusion MRI tractography is inherently limited. doi:10.1073/pnas.1405672111
  84. Reveley, C., Seth, A. K., Pierpaoli, C., Silva, A. C., Yu, D., Saunders, R. C., Leopold, D. A., & Ye, F. Q. (2015). Superficial white matter fiber systems impede detection of long-range cortical connections in diffusion MR tractography. doi:10.1073/pnas.1418198112
  85. Schilling, K. G., Gao, Y., Janve, V., Stepniewska, I., Landman, B. A., & Anderson, A. W. (2018). Confirmation of a gyral bias in diffusion MRI fiber tractography. doi:10.1002/hbm.23936
  86. Gajwani, M., Oldham, S., Pang, J. C., Arnatkevičiūtė, A., Tiego, J., Bellgrove, M. A., & Fornito, A. (2023). Can hubs of the human connectome be identified consistently with diffusion MRI? doi:10.1162/netn_a_00324
  87. He, Y., Hong, Y., Wu, Y., et al. (2024). Spherical-deconvolution informed filtering of tractograms changes laterality of structural connectome. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2024.120904
  88. McMaster, E. M., Newlin, N. R., Rudravaram, G., et al. (2025). Harmonized connectome resampling for variance in voxel sizes. doi:10.1016/j.mri.2025.110424
  89. Manzano-Patrón, J. P., Deistler, M., Schröder, C., et al. (2025). Uncertainty mapping and probabilistic tractography using Simulation-based Inference in diffusion MRI: A comparison with classical Bayes. doi:10.1016/j.media.2025.103580
  90. Zhu, S., Huszar, I. N., Cottaar, M., et al. (2025). Imaging the structural connectome with hybrid MRI-microscopy tractography. doi:10.1016/j.media.2025.103498
  91. Bramati, I. B., Szczupak, D., Carneiro Monteiro, M., Meireles, F., Menezes Guimarães, D., Dean, R. J., Paul, L. K., & Tovar-Moll, F. (2026). Diffusion MRI sampling schemes bias diffusion metrics and tractography. doi:10.3389/fnimg.2026.1670604
  92. Kothe, C., Shirazi, S. Y., Stenner, T., Medine, D., Boulay, C., Grivich, M. I., Artoni, F., Mullen, T., Delorme, A., & Makeig, S. (2025). The lab streaming layer for synchronized multimodal recording. doi:10.1162/IMAG.a.136
  93. Wei, H., Prasad, G., Ombao, H., & Hajnal, J. V. (2020). Bayesian fusion and multimodal DCM for EEG and fMRI. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2020.116595
  94. Vafaii, H., Mandino, F., Desrosiers-Grégoire, G., et al. (2024). Multimodal measures of spontaneous brain activity reveal both common and divergent patterns of cortical functional organization. doi:10.1038/s41467-023-44363-z
  95. Johansen, A., Beliveau, V., Colliander, E., et al. (2024). An In Vivo High-Resolution Human Brain Atlas of Synaptic Density. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1750-23.2024
  96. Lucchetti, F., Céléreau, E., Steullet, P., et al. (2025). Constructing the human brain metabolic connectome with MR spectroscopic imaging reveals cerebral biochemical organization. doi:10.1038/s41467-025-66124-w
  97. Li, X., Zhu, X.-H., Li, Y., et al. (2025). Quantitative mapping of key glucose metabolic rates in the human brain using dynamic deuterium magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging. doi:10.1093/pnasnexus/pgaf072
  98. Kim, J., et al. (2025). Meningeal lymphatics-microglia axis regulates synaptic physiology. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2025.02.022
  99. Fultz, N. E., Bonmassar, G., Setsompop, K., et al. (2019). Coupled electrophysiological, hemodynamic, and cerebrospinal fluid oscillations in human sleep. doi:10.1126/science.aax5440
  100. Kim, D., Huang, Y., & Liu, J. (2025). Non-invasive MRI measurements of age-dependent in vivo human glymphatic exchange using magnetization transfer spin labeling. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2025.121142
  101. Eide, P. K., Pripp, A. H., Valnes, L. M., et al. (2023). Intrathecal cerebrospinal fluid tracer clearance to blood is associated with CSF-to-blood clearance capacity and plasma biomarkers. doi:10.1038/s41467-023-37685-5
  102. Hirschler, L., et al. (2025). Region-specific drivers of cerebrospinal fluid mobility measured with MRI in humans. doi:10.1038/s41593-025-02073-3
  103. Lim, C., Chen, C., Zhang, C., et al. (2025). Human cerebrospinal fluid net flow enhanced by respiration during the awake state. doi:10.1038/s41467-025-66548-4
  104. Yoo, R.-E., Kim, J.-H., Moon, H. Y., et al. (2025). Long-term physical exercise facilitates putative glymphatic and meningeal lymphatic vessel flow in humans. doi:10.1038/s41467-025-58726-1
  105. Dagum, P., et al. (2026). The glymphatic system clears amyloid beta and tau from brain to plasma in humans. doi:10.1038/s41467-026-68374-8
  106. Chen, J. E., Lewis, L. D., Coursey, S. E., et al. (2025). Simultaneous EEG-PET-MRI identifies temporally coupled and spatially structured brain dynamics across wakefulness and NREM sleep. doi:10.1038/s41467-025-64414-x
  107. Bolt, T., Falahpour, M., Nalci, A., et al. (2025). Autonomic physiological coupling of the global fMRI signal. doi:10.1038/s41593-025-01945-y
  108. Epp, S. M., Castrillón, G., Yuan, B., et al. (2025). BOLD signal changes can oppose oxygen metabolism across the human cortex. doi:10.1038/s41593-025-02132-9
  109. Lu, X., Han, X., Meirovitch, Y., Sjöstedt, E., Schalek, R. L., & Lichtman, J. W. (2023). Preserving extracellular space for high-quality optical and ultrastructural studies of whole mammalian brains. doi:10.1016/j.crmeth.2023.100520
  110. MICrONS Consortium, Bae, J. A., Bak, J. H., et al. (2025). Functional connectomics spanning multiple areas of mouse visual cortex. doi:10.1038/s41586-025-08790-w
  111. de Quervain, D. J. F., Roozendaal, B., & McGaugh, J. L. (1998). Stress and glucocorticoids impair retrieval of long-term spatial memory. doi:10.1038/29542
  112. Oei, N. Y. L., Elzinga, B. M., Wolf, O. T., de Ruiter, M. B., Damoiseaux, J. S., Kuijer, J. P. A., Veltman, D. J., Scheltens, P., & Rombouts, S. A. R. B. (2007). Glucocorticoids decrease hippocampal and prefrontal activation during declarative memory retrieval in young men. doi:10.1007/s11682-007-9003-2
  113. McCauley, J. P., Petroccione, M. A., D'Brant, L. Y., et al. (2020). Circadian modulation of neurons and astrocytes controls synaptic plasticity in hippocampal area CA1. doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2020.108255
  114. Barone, I., Gillette, N. M., Hawks-Mayer, H., et al. (2023). Synaptic BMAL1 phosphorylation controls circadian hippocampal plasticity. doi:10.1126/sciadv.adj1010
  115. Birnie, M. T., Begum, G., Sugden, D., et al. (2023). Circadian regulation of hippocampal function is disrupted with corticosteroid treatment. doi:10.1073/pnas.2211996120
  116. Benedict, C., Hallschmid, M., Hatke, A., et al. (2004). Intranasal insulin improves memory in humans. doi:10.1016/j.psyneuen.2004.04.003
  117. Reger, M. A., Watson, G. S., Green, P. S., et al. (2008). Intranasal insulin administration dose-dependently modulates verbal memory and plasma amyloid-beta in memory-impaired older adults. doi:10.3233/JAD-2008-13309
  118. Sherman, S. M., Mumford, J. A., & Schnyer, D. M. (2015). Hippocampal activity mediates the relationship between circadian activity rhythms and memory in older adults. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2015.07.020
  119. Bérut, A., Arakelyan, A., Petrosyan, A., et al. (2012). Experimental verification of Landauer’s principle linking information and thermodynamics. doi:10.1038/nature10872
  120. Attwell, D., & Laughlin, S. B. (2001). An energy budget for signaling in the grey matter of the brain. doi:10.1097/00004647-200110000-00001
  121. Lynn, C. W., et al. (2021). Broken detailed balance and entropy production in the human brain. doi:10.1073/pnas.2109889118
  122. Deco, G., Sanz Perl, Y., Bocaccio, H., Tagliazucchi, E., & Kringelbach, M. L. (2022). The INSIDEOUT framework provides precise signatures of the balance of intrinsic and extrinsic dynamics in brain states. doi:10.1038/s42003-022-03505-7
  123. de la Fuente, L. A., et al. (2023). Temporal irreversibility of neural dynamics as a signature of consciousness. doi:10.1093/cercor/bhac177
  124. Nartallo-Kaluarachchi, R., et al. (2025). Multilevel irreversibility reveals higher-order organization of nonequilibrium interactions in human brain dynamics. doi:10.1073/pnas.2408791122
  125. Ishihara, K., & Shimazaki, H. (2025). State-space kinetic Ising model reveals task-dependent entropy flow in sparsely active nonequilibrium neuronal dynamics. doi:10.1038/s41467-025-66669-w
  126. Martínez, I. A., Bisker, G., Horowitz, J. M., & Parrondo, J. M. R. (2019). Inferring broken detailed balance in the absence of observable currents. doi:10.1038/s41467-019-11051-w
  127. Blom, K., Song, K., Vouga, E., Godec, A., & Makarov, D. E. (2024). Milestoning estimators of dissipation in systems observed at a coarse resolution. doi:10.1073/pnas.2318333121
  128. Baiesi, M., Falasco, G., & Moghimi-Araghi, S. (2024). Effective estimation of entropy production with lacking data. doi:10.1038/s42005-024-01742-2
  129. Poudel, R., et al. (2024). Network representation of fMRI data using visibility graphs: the impact of motion and test-retest reliability. doi:10.1007/s12021-024-09652-y
  130. Metzen, D., et al. (2024). Reliability of variability and complexity measures for task and task-free BOLD fMRI. doi:10.1002/hbm.26778
  131. Chen, Y., et al. (2025). Simultaneous EEG-PET-MRI identifies temporally coupled and spatially structured brain dynamics across wakefulness and NREM sleep. doi:10.1038/s41467-025-64414-x
  132. Epp, S. M., Castrillon, G., Yuan, B., et al. (2025). BOLD signal changes can oppose oxygen metabolism across the human cortex. doi:10.1038/s41593-025-02132-9
  133. Albantakis, L., et al. (2023). Integrated Information Theory (IIT) 4.0. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1011465
  134. Friston, K. (2010). The free-energy principle. doi:10.1038/nrn2787
  135. Casali, A. G., et al. (2013). PCI. doi:10.1126/scitranslmed.3006294
  136. Doerig, A., et al. (2019). Unfolding Argument. doi:10.1016/j.concog.2019.04.002
  137. Tononi, G., et al. (2016). IIT: from the phenomenology to the mechanisms of consciousness. doi:10.1038/nrn.2016.44