New Pre-Print: www.biorxiv.org/cgi/content/... We’re all familiar with having to practice a new skill to get better at it, but what really happens during practice? The answer, I propose, is reinforcement learning - specifically policy-gradient reinforcement learning. Overview 🧵 below...

foci which always shows a zigzag pattern and will have to be mediated by the cortical streams. The nerve spiral game convincingly shows this factual process.

"Walking, stopping and maintaining posture are essential motor behaviors, yet the underlying neural processes remain poorly understood." And they will definitely remain not understood because www.researchgate.net/publication/...

Two autonomous foci: www.researchgate.net/publication/...

"... Yet, these selection processes have classically been studied in isolation, leaving unclear how they are coordinated in time to support behavior. " No, they are already completely explained for 10 years now. But the fact that you don't want to communicate with me (living 300 m. from your work

"Yet, understanding what brain changes in humans underlies the acquisition of complex cognitive skills remains unresolved." It is completely explained: www.researchgate.net/publication/...

The ML illusion is not understood at all in science. The patient D.F. is still capable to execute actions without ever knowing anything about the lines and arrowheads.

The discovery of a double helix was the breakthrough. Science still considers one undivided focus within motor actions. Three autonomous foci need to be executed in every motor action. When will they see it??? 🥲

🧵Nobody will understand but I write it down here for the record. Egocentric actions require 2 foci: f.e. writing www.researchgate.net/publication/...

The discovery of a double helix was the breakthrough. Science still considers one undivided focus within motor actions. Three autonomous foci need to be executed in every motor action.

"....and it remains unclear how the brain integrates these distributions into a coherent temporal prediction." No, it is completely explained in f.e. the game Pong. Our brain uses prior experience to anticipate the catching www.researchgate.net/publication/...

You can't actually talk without inner speech first! www.researchgate.net/publication/...

Ok. Very crucial question: When we use buttons, joy-stick, pedals, you still will argue that we drive the car!? It is regarded as "our" action!? So when we use buttons, joy-stick, pedals on a computer, using AI, it is also "our" action!?

And is completely underpinned with scientific evidence: www.researchgate.net/publication/...

😃 In a new article published in J Biomech, Yılmazgün et al. demonstrate regardless of IMU configuration, CNNs can predict vGRF with high accuracy, followed by apGRF and mlGRF. However, the predictive performance of CNNs may be negatively affected by variability in time series. 👀 buff.ly/lRicHuH

"Ground reaction forces (GRFs) are crucial for understanding movement biomechanics...." Sorry??!!! What a level of science!!! So you can't move in space???:

Feedback is very important and a very powerfull tool for real managers. But feedback and professors is a completely different thing. Never tell a professor he might not see it in the right way.😄😆😂

The ML-illusion is solely important within a tactical preparatory phase! The bridging process within grasping is the most important part.

"While motor imagery engages motor-related brain regions, its precise mechanisms remain unclear.....","... yet the brain-heart relationship is not well understood." It is not understood at all. 🥲

The clarification of the Rubber Hand Illusion will completely explain how, when executing motor actions, we need to make a causal relationship between autonomous internal movements and autonomous external movements. The RHI completely explains body ownership and will be published soon.

The FEP is a fallacy. www.researchgate.net/publication/...

A complete waste of resources. Why does science continue with something which is already completely explained. THERE IS NO MOTOR PLAN. And this is how we serve in tennis: www.researchgate.net/publication/...

Really amazing!!! Well-paid professors having no clue about how we grasp. Or how the patient D.F. posts letters. Solely foucssing on the Müller-Lyer Illusion/Ebbinghaus Illusion etc..

The solution is very simple. 1. Visual perception of sec movement (so that solely concerns that sg. is moving) is direct, continuous and always there from the moment you open your eyes. 2. Visual perception of what moves (object recognition) might be slow (as in requiring ~400ms). Which perfectly

@davidmekhaiel.bsky.social @action-brain.bsky.social @jbjsmeets.bsky.social Is also completely explained. Not reading my work will not change that FACT!!! www.researchgate.net/publication/... journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/...

"Are online corrections to visual targets really a distinct class of movement?" www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1... @action-brain.bsky.social @davidmekhaiel.bsky.social This is completely underpinned and clarified within: www.researchgate.net/publication/...

@mattlongo.bsky.social Within a few weeks I will publish the complete clarification of the Rubber Hand Illusion. For now I can only provide you the explanation why you cant tickle yourself. Which is a prerequisite for understanding the RHI. www.researchgate.net/publication/...

Yes, very correct. As already been explained ~ 10 years ago. The complete explanation of Pong f.e. provides a full clarification of how we anticipate unexpected disturbances in one parts. But shows unequivocally www.researchgate.net/publication/...

Well, that is an easy one!!! We combine clues of the sequence items (what) with clues about the spatio-temporal spaces (how) between those items to templates or at least parts of templates.

Congratulations. But, it is a pity that the part about the functional explanation is already produced, about approx. 10 years ago or so. The YT-clip is very amateurish (but take in mind I have no funds/no institute/nothing helping me) but explains it all. Half www.youtube.com/watch?v=QjO6...

"The research represents a significant leap forward in uncovering the brain’s predictive capabilities and its role in motor control." Well, in fact it is not! The explanation lied there waiting for you from 2016. Do we really have to continue this way? Waiting x www.yorku.ca/news/2025/10...

We construct perceptual images of c.q. we predicitively code latent action trajectory shapes. The scientific evidence and how the cortical streams mediate the mainly egocentric process is in here: www.researchgate.net/publication/...

It is well known that movement accuracy decline if there’s a delay between target vision and movement onset. Is the same true for haptically sensed targets? With @volcic.bsky.social we found that it depends on the posture of the reaching and sensing hands. www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1...

Please, stop that nonsense! As if the sole input is AI???!!! There are multiple social correction mechanisms and even personal correction mechanisms. In the field of cognitive science there are renowned scientists with great factual discoveries (Goodale, Milner, Lee, Vickers, Goodale, Proske).

the brain helps you by predictively coding movement. But if you flicker with your eyes real quickly, which resembles just the pausing of the clip at a single point, the continuous "saccading" will not fulfill its evolutionary task.

Remember that the whole perception organ/system was evolutionarily developed to recognize movement. Our perception processes are comparing all connected time frames and are implicitly catching every vista over and over again. So, perception wants to see movement and with normal visual perception

Please, do not tell me that you can execute straight action trajectories. www.researchgate.net/publication/...

Excuse me?! Even you, yourself, did never grasp a coffee cup exactly alike. Roger Federer have never hit one identical forehand and Michael Johnson never threw one identical basketball shot. You are just not capable of ever creating an exact same

This is already completely explained. Why does science continue with this kind of research? www.researchgate.net/publication/...

The big omission within this research remains not identifying that the autonomous perception of what moves (object recognition) is combined with a completely other autonomous perception of the movement of the object. Which forms the complete answer to these scientific research questions.

The two autonomous foci become very clear within bicycling: www.researchgate.net/publication/...

This is already completely explained. Please, stop the scientific research to the functional explanation of this phenomenon: www.researchgate.net/publication/...

Please provide information!!!! On Bluesky I notice very vivid conversations on neuroscience with a.o.: @earlkmiller.bsky.social, @nicolecrust.bsky.social, @pessoabrain.bsky.social, @dlevenstein.bsky.social etc. etc.. Gramann is also a very active (MoBI) and highly regarded neuroscientist.

All questions are already explained. Speaking and blowing (f.e. candles) compel the exact same perception processes. Read the corresponding articles.

"This combined work has led to deep insights into how basal ganglia regulate movement with great granularity." So many deep insights that science still has absolutely no clue how we grasp a coffee cup at the functional level.🥲