Summary: catch up on 20160216 (Matt) - mobeets/nullSpaceControl GitHub Wiki

I show Matt the "snips" view of how null space activity is changing: From during the intuitive mapping, where it does affect the cursor (black dots), to the first 25% and 50% of trials of the perturbation (no line ends), finally to the last 25% of trials of the perturbation (colored dots):

More simply though, if you just view the perturbation null space activity over time (even starting later in trial count to allow for learning to supposedly be complete), it's clear that things are changing over time:

As Matt puts it, this is a broken assumption of our hypotheses. Learning is still occurring. So how to move forward? He proposes two options:

1. Can choose filtering to insist that there's not that much change

   • i.e., drop out kinematics angle entirely, or at least choose the subset of trials you use based on where the null activity is stable

2. Or could come up with hypotheses that account for changes over time

   • but seems best to focus on where they're not changing, and then approach the learning problem

Also, I should double-check when there's a maximum firing rate constraint: are norms still ~5 times bigger than observed?

(And later today, from his practice cosyne talk:) Per dimension, per angle, calculate progress over time.