ArticleJournal of consciousness studies : controversies in science & the humanities2018
The Physiological Foresight in Freeman's Work: Predictions and Verifications.
Article in Journal of consciousness studies : controversies in science & the humanities, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Spikes as perturbations of resonant neural circuits: an RLC framework with testable predictions.Frontiers in computational neuroscience · 2026Article
- Wider Than the Sky: An Alternative to "Mapping" the World Onto the Brain.The European journal of neuroscience · 2025Article
- Comparison between an exact and a heuristic neural mass model with second-order synapses.Biological cybernetics · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
Freeman's studies on the physiology of the mammalian olfactory system were based on his characterization of activity of neural masses, based on a sigmoid relationship at the mesoscopic scale between population spiking activity as a result of continuous inputs. His early development of computational models to describe oscillatory responses of neural masses allowed him to predict physiological and anatomical properties, some of which required decades of research to be confirmed. His models of neural masses therefore allow us to link between basic physiology and cognitive processes. Through the study of brain physiology at the mesoscopic level, we can understand how internally generated meaning-based responses to sensory input become action and how action leads to perception.
Identifiers
30740028PMC6364850What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.