3-2-1 Contact!

Need a tutor?

ft — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 19:52:23 GMT

Hey people - If you or anyone you know is in need of a tutor, drop me a line! I am a PhD educated scientist and college level instructor. I can tutor a broad variety of subjects, from science and math to English and history. References are available. More details can be found on my academic web page, http://www.cns.nyu.edu/~vessel thanks! Ed

What is the main result?

ft — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 15:54:43 GMT

Given the reviews I got back on a recent manusript, it seems that people are having a hard time grasping the main point of a recent study I did. I thought it might be a useful exercise to write a concise version of that result here and see if I can get the point across. Humans often get enjoyment from visual experiences, and can readily express preferences for some images over others. Whether in an art museum or driving down a highway, some things we see grab us more than others. The scientific study of preference, while extending back over centuries, has recently seen a renaissance using newer methods and based on a firmer understanding of the brain processes underlying visual processes and emotional responses. In many of these recent studies, investigators have sought to understand whether particular aspects of visual material can reliably predict what people like to look at. This tendency to average results across observers goes against the old adage that "beauty is in the eye of the beholder," stressing group norms over the expression of individual taste. However, many of these studies have indeed found that factors common to the experience of all observers can be powerful predictors of preference. Other studies, however, have stressed this need to focus on individual's idiosyncratic preferences as the only way to elucidate the relationship between how a single observer evaluates an image and their preference for that image. Is there a more general principle that can guide this discourse? When can we reasonably expect that people will agree in their preferences, and when must we sacrifice the statistical power that averaging provides and focus on individual preferences instead? In this paper, we report that indeed a general principle does exist which predicts whether people will agree in what they like and dislike, and when people will instead show divergent tastes. We obtained preference judgments from a group of observers on both a set of real-world scenes (photographs of parks, buildings, street scenes, beaches, people, etc.) and a set of abstract images containing no identifiable (e.g. nameable) objects or structure, such as fractals, kaleidoscopic images, and photographs of natural patterns. Using these judgments, we calculated two measures. The first measure, within-observer reliability, indicated that observers were able to make reliable judgments for both sets of images - they were consistent with themselves. The second measure, between-observer agreement, gave us a measure of how much the different subjects agreed with each other. In line with previous findings, observers showed a high degree of agreement with the other observers for real-world scenes - if one observer liked a picture of a beach scene and disliked a picture of a trash dump, the other observers tended to agree. However, observers showed significantly less agreement for the abstract images - a fractal that was highly preferred by one observer was often strongly disliked by another observer. There were even pairs of subjects that showed correlated preferences for real-world scenes, but were then anti-correlated for abstract images. These results provide strong evidence for the importance of semantics (meaning) in determining a subject's preference - if two subjects interpret an image in the same way, as is the case for photographs of everyday scenes and objects (two people are likely to describe a photograph in the same way), then they are likely to also share their like or dislike for that image. However, if two observers have vastly different interpretations for an image, as is often the case for an abstract image such as a fractal, since they do not contain easily identifiable, nameable features, then the preference of one observer will tell us nothing about the preference of the second observer. This result, then, suggests a strong unifying principle that can guide future research into human preferences. If a researcher wishes to identify characteristics of images which lead, on average, to high preference across many people, then their stimulus set should first be tested for the degree to which people agree on the images' meaning. On the other hand, researchers looking to capitalize on the idiosyncrasies of individual observers would do well to use stimuli which contain a minimum of semantic associations.

Just don't have the fight in me anymore

ft — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 21:11:32 GMT

On Monday, I finally heard back from a journal that has been reviewing a manuscript I submitted back in January. Yes, it has taken this journal 7 months to get initial reviews back to me. Their official policy is 2-3 months. And the result .. outright rejection by the editor, w/ no invitation for submitting a revised version (despite the fact that both reviewers gave suggestions for revision and stated their willingness to consider a revised ms). On top of that, the editor misstated the main result of the manuscript. I didn't take this news very well. I was pretty much a wreck all day monday. Yes, its just a manuscript. But this was the 6th journal I had submitted this manuscript to. And in order to have any possible chance of getting a faculty job in the next hiring round (this fall), I have to get this paper accepted somewhere by pretty much the end of this month or October. There is no way in hell any new journal I send this paper to will turn it around that fast. I'm really ready to just give up and fucking throw in the towel. I'm waving my little white flag. And considering whether I think I could maybe start working in music production instead. I just really can't take this crap anymore.

Sleep genes

ft — Thu, 21 Aug 2008 18:29:38 GMT

Kyunghee Koh, William J. Joiner, Mark N. Wu, Zhifeng Yue, Corinne J. Smith, and Amita Sehgal Science 18 July 2008 321: 372-376 http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/sci;321/5887/372?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&andorexacttitleabs=and&fulltext=sleep+gene&andorexactfulltext=and&searchid=1&FIRSTINDEX=0&resourcetype=HWCIT There was an article in Science last month that I found very exciting. In it, authors Koh et al. report the identification of a gene in flies which regulates sleep ... without the protein that the gene codes for, the flies had an 80% reduction in their amount of sleep! To quote the abstract: "We propose that SLEEPLESS is a signaling molecule that connects sleep drive to lowered membrane excitability." The first thing about this article that I thought was really neat is that it addresses what is often thought of as a "cognitive" or psychological process with a molecular process. There are huge loads of work out there looking at sleep from a cognitive perspective ... what are the effects on cognition of sleep deprivation, what processes, such as memory consolidation, take place during sleep, etc. All of these studies are basically coming from the perspective that the "purpose" of sleep is essentially neural ... the brain needs to be shut off from external stimulation so that it can perform essential "housekeeping" functions like memory consolidation. While it is likely true that this is indeed the case, this fly study also points to another, very different potential function of sleep that possibly has very little to do with cognition at all. Clearly it is too early to generalize the result to humans, as it is often the case that a behavior or process that in flies is mediated by a single gene is often mediated by large sets of genes and interacting gene cascades in higher animals. But it certainly is suggestive. The article mentions that several other sleep-related genes have been identified, and that the sleep-wake cycle is most likely regulated by an interaction between circadian rhythms (which may be more neural in nature, and hence body-wide) and sleep-promoting factors like the gene they have identified (which may be more local in nature). So, here is my wild conjecture, pretty much totally unsupported by the article, but that was really fun to think about after perusing it quickly. Perhaps there are cellular processes that go on throughout our waking day which lead to the accumulation of certain "waste" products in the cell or the degradation of membrane molecules, etc. The accumulation of these within the cell may eventually trigger the release of sleep-promoting proteins into the extracellular fluid. Over the course of the day, as many of the bodies' cells accumulate waste products or undergo wear and tear, these sleep-promoting proteins accumulate in the bloodstream. When the circadian cycle begins to tip towards sleep at the end of the day, receptors in the brain for these sleep-promoting proteins are also highly active, and together, these processes lead the organism's nervous system to progress towards a sleep state. While in the sleep state, a number of processes are happening ... in the brain, all of those "neural housekeeping" functions are occurring, aiding in memory consolidation, etc. But at the cellular level, perhaps there are also a great many "housekeeping" functions that require the body to be mostly _still_ for them to function. It is not hard to imagine that some membrane repair processes or waste trafficking inside individual cells require a near complete lack of acceleration to happen correctly (because they utilize gravity to move a chemical gradient, or require a minimal tension on membranes, etc). In other words ... maybe our body's individual cells need us to _stop_moving_ for an extended period each day in order to repair and clean themselves. No one individual cell has the ability to tell the entire organism to be completely still ... only by the secretion of this local chemical signal, accumulated and acting upon the nervous system, can bring the whole organism to a state where acceleration is at a minimum. Although I find neural explanations for the function of sleep to both be really interesting and compelling, I can't help but smile at the idea that a process that affects our mental life as individuals as strongly as sleep does may, in part, be dictated by stuff going on in individual cells (and not even neurons). My conjecture may prove to be totally wrong, but its fun to think about the possible existence of such a compelling "local to global" signaling mechanism. Yay science geekery. I stop now.

Writing

ft — Thu, 21 Aug 2008 17:52:05 GMT

Writing doesn't come easy to me. It is a forced, drawn out thing, and I am usually not very happy with the final product. Writing diary entries for myself to spew out negativity and insecurities is one thing ... no one else ever has to read it. But crafting sentences that others can make sense of and possibly even be entertained by is a whole other story. Given that my chosen career hinges critically on my ability to write about what I've done, I think I had better start working on making it easier =) The first step of my plan is to stop being so hard on myself and give myself room to write about whatever, whenever. I'm definitely my own biggest enemy when it comes to getting my thoughts out there. Here is a strategy that I'm hoping will help ... write about things I'm actually excited about! Hopefully this will help me associate writing with positive emotions and a sense of accomplishment, and make it easier for me to just flow with the words and not get so caught up in details. Towards this goal, I'm going to start writing little snippets about science topics that I find interesting. Tribe seems as good of a place as any. Wow. I just sat here for like 5 minutes trying to recall the second part of my plan =) Heh. Umm, my brain hurts. Okay, here it is .. I'm going to make regular "appointments" with myself to write. But these appointments can be for me to write about anything. Some days, hopefully I'll work on manuscripts. But if I'm just not feeling that, I can leave this time open to write about other things, whether it be in a personal journal, in a blog, or on a wall in red crayon ;-)

My head . . .

ft — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 19:33:07 GMT

. . . just doesn't feel right today. hrmph. And I don't know how to make it feel better.

UPDATE for Double Rainbow this Friday

ft — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 20:44:57 GMT

UPDATE!!! I'm doing the opening set from 10pm - 11:45pm. GET THERE EARLY, you lazy motherf*ckers, to help me get this party started! and WEAR BLINKIES!! YOU are the Rainbow =) Blink loud and blink proud! Friday, Oct. 12th - DISORIENT presents Double Rainbow! http://newyork.tribe.net/event/DISORIENT-presents-Double-Rainbow/new-york-ny/b05de455-2a5d-4044-a7a7-58c86a3fee1c

I <3 ...

ft — Wed, 13 Jun 2007 03:13:36 GMT

my friends =)

HOOKERS!!

ft — Sun, 03 Jun 2007 18:05:35 GMT

That is all.

Texas bound (and gagged)

ft — Wed, 16 May 2007 21:30:49 GMT

Flipside here I come! I'm starting to get reeeaallly excited.

Ho hum

ft — Sun, 14 Jan 2007 21:43:12 GMT

Chillin' at home on a sunday afternoon ... and boy do I need it! It feels nice to just veg out for a while. A little respite before the madness begins again. Enjoy your lazy sunday, whatever you are up to! Mmm ... magnolia cupcakes ... =)

Vote Green!!

ft — Tue, 07 Nov 2006 06:30:05 GMT

http://www.nypeaceslate.org/about_the_ten_key_values_of_the_green_party.php The goal of the NY Green party in tomorrow's election is to get 5% of the vote. This will allow Green Party candidates to appear on the 2008 ballot _without_ having to gather thousands and thousands of signatures. It may seem like an unimportant thing but ballot access is the first step ... If you weren't planning on voting at all tomorrow ... here is your chance to contribute to a growing movement in a significant way. The Green Party needs your vote.

Infovore

ft — Fri, 04 Aug 2006 17:40:19 GMT

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg19125612.200.html The new scientist picked up our article in American Scientist about perceptual pleasure. It seems they really like the word "infovore." I kinda doubt I'm the first person to ever dream up this word, but I can honestly say that I hadn't ever heard it before and really felt that it described what we were trying to study. Of course, given Irv's status as first author on that piece he will get more of the credit for it, but hey, beggars can't be choosers, right? ;-)

Woohoo!

ft — Tue, 18 Apr 2006 20:17:48 GMT

Check it out ... http://www.americanscientist.org/template/AssetDetail/assetid/50770 Brains!!

getting published

ft — Sun, 05 Mar 2006 08:01:24 GMT

I'm in a professional field where one must "publish" or one will "perish." I suck at finishing manuscripts. But, I'm getting better. I've got a paper submitted right now that is a revised version of a manuscript that got rejected once from another journal. I'm hoping for the best! Send me good publishing juju, please!!

Spreadin' the music

ft — Fri, 10 Feb 2006 18:18:55 GMT

Yay! I'm very excited. After having some difficulty getting going here in NY with the whole DJ thang, things have been good lately. Ben and I have been doing our new biweekly house/lounge night Sofa since early December, and it seems to just keep getting better =) I've also been meeting more and more fun DJ/party type folks, and am starting to feel like part of the electronic music community here. There is a party on the 18th of February thrown by the ever stylish Winkel (details coming soon), and there are rumblings of a few other events / club gigs in the works. Speaking of which ... if any of you out there would be interested in collaborating with me on a large scale ambient/chill event (ala The Big Chill, Cloudwatch, Freon, etc.) here in New York, drop me a line. Thanks to all of you who have supported me musically over the years ... by giving me encouragement, dancing to my tunes, booking me for events, helping put together events, etc. It means a lot to me that my friends like what I'm doing. If I hadn't had the support I do, I think I probably would have sold my tables and vinyl a long time ago. keep on dancin' !!

NYC Decom Lineup (Sat., Nov 19th)

ft — Fri, 18 Nov 2005 16:44:08 GMT

Hey people - so, here is the performance lineup for Decom on saturday. Ben and I got a very early slot, but hey, what are you going to do. If you are able to make it out in time, make sure to scream and shout a lot and tell everyone how much you are enjoying our set to help them realize we are the best damn thing they've ever heard and we deserve to play a prime timeslot =) And if you miss our set ... I'm sure you will enjoy the other DJ's and bands playing too =) Hope to see some of you there! Ed p.s. today is the last day to buy advance tickets ($20). After midnight, tickets are $25 at the door in costume, $35 w/o get yours now! http://www.brownpapertickets.com/event/2670 http://www.nydecom.org ----------- ok folks here it is, there is something going on from the time the doors open until they close. and please be appreciative and give thanks to all the great performers coming out to entertain and inspire us. *MAIN STAGE INDOORS* 2:00 pm RGB - (live music) 2:35 pm DJ Juicy 3:00 pm adam matta - (beat box) 3:30 pm Dj Dragon - (Rock and Roll) 4:00 pm Vox Illuminati - (live music ) 4:45 pm Dj Juicy 5:15 pm everything you've ever wanted - (live music) 6:00 pm Been Jammin and Friar Tuck - (House) 6:50 pm Pretty Flowers - (Live music) 7:30 pm Artur - (House) 8:20 pm me eat egg live - (music) 9:05 pm Vitamin Devo & Bianca - (House) 9:55 pm psylab live - (music) 10:55 pm spiro - (Breaks) 11:45 pm live theater acts 12:15 am Mikio (Tribal Breaks) 1:15 am Orion - (House) 2:15 am haj & Sunder & Dhruva - (Breaks) 3:15 am wolf + lamb to close - (Something Special Just For Us) *OUTSIDE DISORIENT SOUND* 2:00 pm dj dragon disorient - (deep tribal house) 2:45 pm trouble disorient - (old school) 3:30 pm valerie (ambient) 4:15 pm lord pyro (chillout/hiphop) 5:30 pm mic rage (breaks) 6:15 pm moldover (mashups) 7:00 pm small change (funky breaks/old school) 8:00 pm Jordan 9:00 pm sheldon drake (tribal/techno) *OUTSIDE IMAGE NODE SOUND* 10 pm Habitrail (IDM) 11 pm Socks and Sandals (minimal techno) 12 am Sneeker (minimal techno) 1 am The Holy Mobot (minimal tech/house freakout) 2 am The Eye/TBA (ambient) 3 am to close: Imagenode Jam Session (you'll see God!)

George Runs the NY Marathon

ft — Wed, 09 Nov 2005 22:48:35 GMT

Ahh, the sweet taste of success. My buddy George Miranda flew out to New York from LA with his sister Jules and her boyfriend John. Not only was it a chance for me to go root for a guy who really deserves it, it also provided an opportunity for a mini Stormriders reunion. You can check out some pictures and videos of the run on my website: http://thegoodfriar.com (click on 'Pictures' then 'NY Marathon')

BeeeeeeeeeEEEEEEEEEeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeOOOOOoooooooooooooEEEEEeeeeeeeee

ft — Fri, 30 Sep 2005 17:44:28 GMT

Shari and I watched "Its All Gone Pete Tong" the other night. I thought it was really good. It also scared me. I've had tinnitus for a few years now ... it comes and goes. Sometimes it is an omnipresent high pitch, other times its totally absent. Sometimes its there but I just don't notice. Yeah, everyone tells DJ's to be careful, to wear earplugs, etc. But its soo hard! Music just doesn't sound the same with earplugs. And DJ'ing with earplugs is really fucking difficult. I want to have my hearing for a long time, so I often do take earplugs with me to events, and I also do my best when I DJ to make the situation easier on my ears. The key is to be able to hear your mix without having to crank the headphones or DJ booth to extreme levels. By far the best thing I've found to prevent this is making sure that the DJ booth is properly set up. For those of you who set up DJ booths (for clubs or parties or whatever), there are a few things you can do to help your favorite DJ from losing their hearing: 1.) Isolate the DJ booth from the main sound system. There is nothing worse than having to crank your headphones because you've got a stack of speakers blaring right at you. Pointing a part of the main soundsystem at the DJ does not count as a "monitor." If you have big speaker stacks, put them far enough in front of the DJ booth that the DJ isn't getting direct sound from them. Definitely don't put the DJ right between two stacks. The bass overpowers everything and the DJ will have to crank the headphones and monitors to hear anything. 2.) Give the DJ a proper monitor. It needs to be a good speaker (or two), preferably with a flatter sound response than the main system (though this is a matter of personal taste I guess). It should be controllable by the DJ (e.g. by a "booth" volume knob). And it shouldn't be _right_ next to the turntables, but maybe a short distance (2 feet or so) away (also personal preference I guess). And make sure it is isolated from the main system! =) 3.) Check with the DJ often to make sure that they can hear ok, and also to let them know how the main system sounds. Better balanced sound means you don't have to crank it up as much for it to sound good. My ears (and yours) will thank you! Friar Tuck

Spain Photos

ft — Wed, 21 Sep 2005 22:24:14 GMT

I went to Spain! I took pictures! You can look at them! http://thegoodfriar.com click on "Pictures" and then on "Spain"

Disconnected

ft — Wed, 07 Sep 2005 23:06:17 GMT

Hey folks. Maybe its because I was traveling by myself for a while. Maybe its because I'm all caught up in work. Maybe its this head cold I've got. =) Whatever the reason, I'm feeling kinda disconnected. So drop me a line! I'd love to hear what you've been up to. Tell me about LA. Tell me about Burning Man. Tell me about your vacation. Tell me about some great music you heard or some awesome person you met. Tell me how your life is going. I'm listening =)