Back

Linking Labs: Interconnecting Experimental Environments

Schultz, T.; Putze, F.; Fehr, T.; Meier, M.; Mason, C.; Ahrens, F.; Herrmann, M.

2021-02-09 neuroscience
10.1101/2021.02.09.430407 bioRxiv
Show abstract

We introduce the concept of LabLinking: a technology-based interconnection of experimental laboratories across institutions, disciplines, cultures, languages, and time zones - in other words experiments without borders. In particular, we introduce LabLinking levels (LLL), which define the degree of tightness of empirical interconnection between labs. We describe the technological infrastructure in terms of hard- and software required for the respective LLLs and present examples of linked laboratories along with insights about the challenges and benefits. In sum, we argue that linked labs provide a unique platform for a continuous exchange between scientists and experimenters, thereby enabling a time synchronous execution of experiments performed with and by decentralized user and researchers, improving outreach and ease of subject recruitment, allowing to establish new experimental designs and to incorporate a panoply of complementary biosensors, devices, hard- and software solutions.

Matching journals

The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
● 5266 papers in training set
Top 12%
15.4%
Similar papers in this journal
2
Scientific Reports
○ 3612 papers in training set
Top 10%
6.8%
Similar papers in this journal
3
eneuro
● 439 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
6.8%
Similar papers in this journal
4
Journal of Neuroscience Methods
○ 122 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
6.3%
Similar papers in this journal
5
Behavior Research Methods
○ 30 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
5.2%
Similar papers in this journal
6
Frontiers in Psychiatry
○ 87 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
4.4%
7
eLife
● 5828 papers in training set
Top 30%
4.1%
8
Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
○ 49 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
3.3%
50% of probability mass above
9
IEEE Access
● 35 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
3.3%
10
Scientific Data
○ 209 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
2.8%
11
PLOS Computational Biology
● 1863 papers in training set
Top 11%
2.7%
12
Journal of Neural Engineering
○ 221 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.5%
13
Nature Communications
○ 5641 papers in training set
Top 39%
2.4%
14
iScience
○ 1154 papers in training set
Top 13%
2.1%
15
Frontiers in Neuroscience
○ 256 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.1%
16
Heliyon
○ 152 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.7%
17
Imaging Neuroscience
● 282 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.3%
18
Journal of Medical Internet Research
◐ 87 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
19
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
○ 77 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.1%
20
Sensors
○ 43 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.1%
21
Current Protocols
○ 15 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.0%
22
Methods
○ 34 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.0%
23
NeuroImage
○ 903 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.9%
24
IEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics
● 37 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
25
Journal of Visualized Experiments
● 34 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.9%
26
Neuroinformatics
○ 46 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.9%
27
Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal
● 242 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.9%
28
HardwareX
○ 18 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.6%
29
Ecology and Evolution
○ 267 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.6%
30
Cerebral Cortex
◐ 396 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.6%

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.