<a href="https://www.patreon.com/braininspired"></a>



<a href="https://www.patreon.com/braininspired">Support the show</a> to get full episodes, full archive, and join the Discord community.







The Transmitter is an online publication that aims to deliver useful information, insights and tools to build bridges across neuroscience and advance research. Visit thetransmitter.org to explore the latest neuroscience news and perspectives, written by journalists and scientists.



Read more about <a href="https://www.thetransmitter.org/partners/">our partnership</a>.



Sign up for <a href="https://www.thetransmitter.org/newsletters/">Brain Inspired email alerts</a> to be notified every time a new Brain Inspired episode is released.



To explore more neuroscience news and perspectives, visit <a href="http://thetransmitter.org">thetransmitter.org</a>.



A few episodes ago, episode 212, I <a href="https://braininspired.co/podcast/212/">conversed with John Beggs</a> about how criticality might be an important dynamic regime of brain function to optimize our cognition and behavior. Today we continue and extend that exploration with a few other folks in the criticality world.



Woodrow Shew is a professor and runs the <a href="https://www.woodrowshew.com/home">Shew Lab</a> at the University of Arkansas. Keith Hengen is an associate professor and runs the <a href="https://hengenlab.org/">Hengen Lab</a> at Washington University in St. Louis Missouri. Together, they are Hengen and Shew on a recent review paper in Neuron, titled <a href="https://www.cell.com/neuron/fulltext/S0896-6273(25)00391-5">Is criticality a unified setpoint of brain function?</a> In the review they argue that criticality is a kind of homeostatic goal of neural activity, describing multiple properties and signatures of criticality, they discuss multiple testable predictions of their thesis, and they address the historical and current controversies surrounding criticality in the brain, surveying what Woody thinks is all the past studies on criticality, which is over 300. And they offer a account of why many of these past studies did not find criticality, but looking through a modern lens they most likely would. We discuss some of the topics in their paper, but we also dance around their current thoughts about things like the nature and implications of being nearer and farther from critical dynamics, the relation between criticality and neural manifolds, and a lot more. You get to experience Woody and Keith thinking in real time about these things, which I hope you appreciate.



<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li><a href="https://www.woodrowshew.com/home">Shew Lab</a>.</li>



<li><a href="https://hengenlab.org/">Hengen Lab</a>.</li>



<li><a href="https://www.cell.com/neuron/fulltext/S0896-6273(25)00391-5">Is criticality a unified setpoint of brain function?</a></li>
</ul>



0:00 - Intro
3:41 - Collaborating
6:22 - Criticality community
14:47 - Tasks vs. Naturalistic
20:50 - Nature of criticality
25:47 - Deviating from criticality
33:45 - Sleep for criticality
38:41 - Neuromodulation for criticality
40:45 - Criticality Definition part 1: scale invariance
43:14 - Criticality Definition part 2: At a boundary
51:56 - New method to assess criticality
56:12 - Types of criticality
1:02:23 - Value of criticality versus other metrics
1:15:21 - Manifolds and criticality
1:26:06 - Current challenges

Podurama

Home

Trending

Personal

Your Podcasts

New Episodes

My Files

Favourite Episodes

Tags (Folders)

Recently Played

Bookmarks

Followed Playlists

BI 216 Woodrow Shew and Keith Hengen: The Nature of Brain Criticality

Brain Inspired

AI Chapters

AI Insights

Reviews