 I did not mention something here, I was just discussing with Dr. Bragmushan about using the resting state of Moray, which I did not touch actually here. Now, this question became relevant because he was surprised the guy who discovered resting state was an Indian, Bharat Biswan and that was his PGA topic and he just will do the paradigm without doing any paradigm, just do take on, off, on, off like that. And it was primarily designed because children, it is difficult to train them to, especially doing difficult paradigms, motor they would do, senses they would do, language they may still do, but getting the memory and getting into emotion, getting into other paradigm, it is pain, no, they do not cooperate with you. And when it comes to smaller children, like children who need sedation to be in the machine, how do you do this? So, that is where the new methodology what is called as a functional connectivity MRI or resting state of Moray became available about 7, 8 years back. We have a large data available with the test BGI, I think we have loaded a tested, because we are busy with so many things which we are having, you know, beside of clinical responsibilities. But this is one area which can really take care of your needs, you do not have design paradigms actually. You can look at your domain, what you are expecting and you can do a connectivity based on domains, surface connectivity, functional connectivity and collecting the DTI. Tectography, that has become the new thing. The last 2 years, a number of people has become collecting the DTI with the network connectivity. So, that is what has become very, very important today and I think we need to work on our data as we go back. I think next month on what I will start working on the data also. We have huge data line with us, because every patient was going to the machine, we are doing the resting state as routine and it is of subject. So, we have a huge data line of 7 policy B12, especially we have data available on them and we had a lot of work on this and we have looked into this. So, children is a difficult proposition to work with. They have to understand what you are doing and the best way to do is they do a resting state with them and that is the only way to do that. The reason is, I always believe that you are not trading them with anything and you are getting your domains from the connectivity which is a natural connectivity of the brain. Even in like, there are example people in like deep coma. In a deep coma, if you look at the, I have got data from the brain dead patient actually. I have looked at the data. I have 3 patients who are brain dead or near brain dead, where I have got a functional data. All connectivity just slowed down or just disappears. That is the proof of concept actually. We have not published it actually. We have not looked at the data. It is a fantastic data that you have. I would, that is what I am saying. We have a, we have a huge boss, Dr. Latter did not have much time and he was busy. We are busy with other things, but we have to look at the data actually. In the next, if you are interested, I can give you the data, look at this with Dr. Latter actually. That is a huge strength we have with us, dead brain data. There is a confirmation of death by no flow in the brain and there are ways to confirm that and the guy was dead actually. You can actually see how the cobitose patient, we have got cobitose patient data also, grades 3, grade 2, grade 1, grade 4. You can see how the arousal, the brain arousal, that is important, affects the connectivity. I am sure if you are interested, we can give you the data to look at and let Dr. Latter spend some time with it and may be Vasudevi could set up some of the things which we have done and then you can move from there. Unfortunately, my data which we have I am not able to look at all the data because the critical responsibilities are so many that most of the time we are working on the patient and whatever time we look at the science, that is the problem. You see, I always believe that you cannot force a brain to think what you want to think, whatever paradigm you generate and paradigm you are training the guy to think those things, to do those things, that is why the resting state became the reality. You are not training for anything, you are not doing anything, you are looking at the domains and checking how they are done. So, I am not sure it is really true, whatever you may still be told to do x paradigm start thinking of y paradigm in the machine. I mean, there is no control on that and even when you are lying quiet, resting state, if you call it, see another interesting I will tell you about the FMRIS, then when I was doing the resting state or otherwise like the motor function and all, a lot of activity coming in the occipital brain because the eyes, you are seeing through the eyes, you see a lot of activity in the brain. Even the resting state, if you close the eyes and open the eyes, there is a difference in the activity. So, whether you like it or not, you see things yourself, you do it what you are doing and that will only when reflected in the brain, the brain is functioning, what are you doing. So, I am not sure what will be published is all truth you know and you have to take it as a bench of salt. The question that I have is how can we use FMRIS for naturalistic models. For example, where the people actually have to be exposed to real situations. For example, say driving or when piloting aircraft or something, if we do want to understand on a neural basis. Yeah, that is a good question because I happen to know somebody who was working on you know how to find out somebody is accident prone or not you know. It in context with the hepatic and sublimatic, a lot of patients who could live on dysfunction, they have a dysfunction on the brain condition and the biggest problem with them is how to ensure they are safe drivers or not. So, design a paradigm in which the guy actually sits on the you know apparent on the make believe or virtual you know car and start driving the car. So, you can create a virtual situations you know like a pilot driving the aircraft or suddenly some dog comes and he likes you know like you must be saying if you go to like this you see in Los Angeles Universal Studio and look at the 3D saying you actually feel you are you are going to hit somebody you know and I was scared actually. So, you can create some simulators by which you can actually create situations on the console and that is possible within the machine. Otherwise machine cannot go in the sky to do that something you know. So, best way to create a paradigm and that I learned from that guy who is very smart either reading guy in myoclinic who developed a methodology to find out that how you can be accident prone and why not adjust simulations or virtual methods of doing things. So, is there any technical development for example, if we leave out fMRI where we do not have to use these virtual systems and the person is actually put into the real situations and we can still get to know the green areas behind it or the underlying neural connections. See I told you the beginning there are three methods one is a imaging method, hemodynamic method, the second one is the neural method, neural stimulation method. You can do a electronic photography EEG you can take a small MBGs and check that that is the only way you can look at the function of brains outside the otherwise you need a magnet you need the whole set of things to see the hemodynamic change. It does not have a resolution special resolution it has a very excellent temporal resolution. So, people have done that actually it is not something new people have done all kind of situation where they can put electrodes and check for the you know brain activity during that like you know you must be knowing that lie detector reducing with the use. So, they use all this MEG, EEG, all kind of heart rate this is it all physiology are using to check those things that you can do anywhere for that you do not need a very high infrastructure, but for this kind of methodology you need a hardware which cannot go to the real situation actually. Within that they do not explain the actual underlying structures as that is what I told you. That is that is all saying that is that is that is this is like making believe and that is real believing it. I always believe that once you train a guy that is why I say see when you when I do imaging of the brain I see the actual brain whether you are training me load the brain is great right I can see the structure that tracks in the brain I can see the tracks in the brain myself you do not change the tracks in the brain. The same way when the guy is lying quietly inside the machine whatever is thinking we do not know what is thinking that gets reflected into the network you know. So, that is why I call it this is called an objective assessment of the brain and this is a subjective assessment of the brain I call it and whatever you see even I am talking to you I you may not be listening to me you have somewhere else. So, everybody has a attention span right it varies from x to y timing, but it is something which is not really you know constant. So, so many times when I am talking to somebody suddenly my brain goes somewhere he thinks I am listening to him and I am somewhere else. So, this thing happens all the time with all of us. So, to say that you are attentive to what I am saying how I guarantee that what I am saying to do you are doing that think of a woman think of a kind think of something you know of a god think of a devil. So, it depends on what you think, but actual thinking I do not know what is actual thinking yes. So, that is the biggest issue with the f real application of paradigms and then I told you about that getting used to a paradigm familiarizing with paradigm you know that becomes another issue that is why in a very big way the resting state is becoming very very popular method. I think the last five years you read the paper resting state of why there are huge number of problems because it has no subjectivity no subjectivity all objective. How you analyze the data that becomes now the analytical tools become like professor Rathar will give or somebody has will give that is becomes most important part there is subjectivity. So, that is the way one has to move in the functional MRI improvement resolution and improvement is learning connectivity. In fact, there is a big grant which is being run in US a lot of money has been pumped in by Obama is the collective project and the collective project is nothing but collecting the function and wires in the brain functional structural connectivity. This is all this resting state and this Q ball imaging or DSI they are the one they are the one it is getting and the FC of mori. Note the bold of mori FC of mori then becoming more. We started working on a four years back on FC mori, but we never published anything we never did anything very exciting area you know FC mori because there is no involvement of the patient like you do imaging and see images the same way you see the function and see how they are connected to the wires like fibres fibres and with the DSI you can go to sub cortical fibres the resolution is so high different spectrum imaging DSI. I wanted to ask you something you made a statement that when you take a subject and put a mark into a simulator basically there is a great degree of habituation effect something that usually in behavioral studies one would like to get rid of psychologist would like to have a unconditioned and habituated type of a response considering that fine this is a true response, but in the real medical practice you would have a patients whom you cannot ask to know undergo a situation phenomena in the simulator. So can one construe it that if you have certain type of psychological functions cognitive functions which are derived out of patient population research that would be much more objective compared to where you have the normal participants who are sent to simulators and then introduced to you know I totally agree with you on this because like I give you an example if I perform the same test as a volunteer 2 time or 3 times I know what I am doing now it is a teaching in psychology and you know more about that I know about that that never perform the same test again for a week at least let them forget what they did you know like jigsaw puzzle for a small child children they are very smart they will quickly pick up once they pick up then they can tell you without without you telling them anything you know. So that is a big problem with all of us you know when we see the time you know and try to get different kind of persons to of the same paradigm so that they do not have the reputation of things you know there are other method using the number connection test or the figure connection test. So once somebody knows 1 2 3 how they play they just he does it that quickly and finishes connect the whole thing but first timer what it does especially in disease is a real life situation and we do it every day we do it like a lot but once you give one person 3 times the same person who is disease he will do better next time I am telling you that we all do that and most you understand you also know the way how to come to the room first I will take 5 minutes second and 3 times the next time 2 minutes I will be there it is what is called a habituation fact learning fact or whatever you know that is there. So same thing happens in that is why I stress on this resting state and look at the look at your own domains inside the resting state that is more meaningful than actually doing the true bold meaning that is old knowledge is people looking different because there are no limitations you know and to know a limitation about technique is more important than knowing the usefulness of technique that makes you more alert about what is otherwise you keep writing the crap the same crap again again which is all good for the science. Also in terms of say with respect to the pain sensitivity the physiologically derived pain versus the emotional appraisal of the pain there are no in all religious practices you have certain type of belief based practice which forces you to inflict pain on yourself say one religious community. More on. More on for example. Walk you go on fire walk you go on fire I mean I see them every day you know I was looking at one television episode where you know the person had multiple cuts it was knife cut throughout his body it was profusely bleeding and but then because somebody had convinced him that this is what you know this is how with every cut your sins are also being removed. So with multiple cuts the man still was no without sign of pain. So I give you a simple example a guy who comes to the village he is told us to pain because he is used to some pain and the second thing he is told in the brain like the same person when he rolls on a fire for religious purpose and he rolls in a normal circle there is a difference because he is conditioned the brain is conditioned that this is important for you this is good for you I must do it I must do it and the same in a normal situation you will not do it. So the brain conditioning has a lot of effect on the functionality of the brain I also so that is why always try to see a unconditioned brain not conditioned the brain. And there is also an interesting whole set of neuropsychological test batteries there happens to be a fantastic test in terms of capturing the overall cognitive state of an individual in terms of how X type of a cognitive function is being performed. I was once just going through the details of how this test actually got evolved and the best part of it was that there were a set of items usually the way psychological tests are designed but then for all of them MRI was done. Usually the standard way the way psychologists would use it that you have a set of performance activities and then you run factor analysis and then on the base of the eigenvalue and the factor load cross load you drop the items this is the standard way that this are being evolved it was a fantastic way where it was not basically the statistical properties but it was rather the magnetic visible and many, many items got deleted many things had to be evolved and I read in the historical incidents how that finally the final version came forward with multiple revisions that it was primarily outcome of the MRI which decided whether a particular item should be retained in the test or not. More objective. More objective and that is the reason why in still in many clinics where they have psychologists in the neurosurgery departments there they use disarray test because they know that fine this is a well validated test so there is no need for MRI right now to be performed. You just have a few selective tests to see the outcome and you know that fine this is how the thing is working before surgery of course you will have the scanning done. Good thing happened to psychology is that MRI objective is a whole thing and with that I will say with all the limitations I have talked about I am not trying to criticize too much of the technology also but technology still evolving one has to evolve the technology you cannot be at the same position you have to move forward what we are getting so that is what we have to do actually I cannot still do a bold when I would rest instead the connect term is a connecting function and structure wiring current functions you have the functioning brain but there is a road block it does not function right. Then the guy find what is the find some alternative routes of coming you know we call it a accessory area secondary area in the brain or tertiary area in the brain to function something like that it comes you know they all come because of this thing only you know and I think this is going to be the future of collective is going to be the future for understanding brain function. But I am planning to write a grant where I will know all about doctor and so on. If you can put that grant especially in B 12 contact which I will talk tomorrow you know which is interesting very interesting to my mind and then we can connect the real you know structure and function to understand why it is happening. Talking about clinical population let us say we have others who have some kind of intellectual disability let us say mental retardation or any kind of developmental disability let us say autism suppose you are interested in a particular paradigm let us say the paradigm is to see how they match it is a matching task right. So, is it a good idea to take individuals who can a group cannot match and who have the same disability a little bit I did to compare with. No, you should not go. Or take one group that has the disability and compare it with a normal. Normal. Individuals who have autism or mental retardation obviously the brain is compromising some of the other type and within that you have high function and no function. One group is able to perform the other group is not able to perform. So, when you are trying to compare it is to be the idea to compare between the disability group or take children who have this mental retardation autism and see how they perform in relation to children more normally. So, which is a better paradigm. See, it is a question of what kind of population you are handling. If your power analysis tells you you have the numbers in each group. There is subgroup policy and it is important. I will show an example tomorrow where I have taken children with cerebral palsy with low IQ with normal IQ and compare the cognition with the DTI. How they fare differently? How their IQ affects the technography and the functionality. So, it is always good to have subgroups if possible. The numbers allow it to take. It will take numbers if they are giving you false impression. They should be statistically viable in terms of power analysis, in terms of justification numbers you are taking. They should do it well. That gives you a better understanding of the whole analysis which you are doing. Subgrouping is always good as long as you have the numbers. I can make a suggestion. Maybe we can have a project in which not just we work with those templates to take an individual's data and then put it on that template and match. But then, imbue the template with other things. So, like all these collectivities. So, I mean we make it a little functional brain let us say. So, we have the associated images which will make the corresponding volume. And then we have the tracks. We have the areas. We know a little bit about their functionality. So, whatever is known, we code all that and make it a kind of functional software. And then whatever you expect in psychology. So, this area will be activated. Why it will be activated? Whatever you are doing, what is the purpose of that? How does it interact with the psychology of the person? All these things are put as associated properties whatever is known. So, those things are known. So, then I know that if I activate over here then it has a relation with these things. So, much is normal. And then is there some abnormal reaction or there is something extra. And then what is normal? How much should be normal correlation? So, all this could be done by making a model and then I mean just like you are having simulators. So, here then for emotions, what are the kind of actions which will take place? We can code those. And then along, so now this becomes our setup instead of just the template. No, I agree. I see to begin with you start somewhere. But you can create your own template number one. Like I give an example, MNI template. But MNI is basically if you have larger normal. First of all what is normal? That question is always now after having the last couple of years seen that. I am not sure we are all normal. We are abnormal in some way or the other. To define normality, if it is like 66 percent or like outlier 33 percent, I do not know how to. And which way, which aspect we are 66 percent, which way we are 33 percent, we do not know. So, that is another issue which I always debate in my mind that why I am normal and why this guy is not normal. That is the question which you, the same two individuals you can question yourself. And you must be seeing that discussion. While you have a heated discussion with your friend or your colleague is, oh, this guy is not normal. He is something wrong with him. So, to define normality is a big issue by itself. So, I do not understand how to define normality. Is it biochemical normality or functional normality or morphological normality? So, I really do not understand this question. It is a big question. I am not here at any length of time, you know, without any problem. But what you have suggestions is a good suggestion, but it needs a lot of effort and dedicated groups who work on this and definitely come out with it. I always believe that we published a paper not with the part of the paper where we showed that the Indian brain development, children, the brain development in the, in the, in the child, in utero, it follows different pattern than what Americans have described. We published that based on the astrology and DTI. And when I showed that to the DBT, they were amazed. They said, nobody has done this. See, we do not know. We always compare with the western world. Our gold standard is the west, not us. I think you and myself have discussed a number of times regarding, you know, the same paradigm or a psychological community paradigm used in eastern UP, the same paradigm used in Olisa, the same, a different meaning. And you cannot generalize the paradigm used in X part of the country, even the country and the Y part of the country. Because the local dialects, the way they perceive things is different. In Delhi, it is different. In Gurgaon, it is different. I have seen now. In Lucknow, it is different. In Kalman, it is different. So, one has to create, I think, we had discussed at length a number of times how to create our own paradigms based on the local language, the local understanding, the local dialects. What is common to a person in this part of the world? Maybe the bird is a sparrow. For some, the bird is a parrot. For some, the bird is something else. Or, you know what I mean? So, this is important. So, you have to generate your paradigm, the local dialects, the local needs, the local understanding of the subject. So, and what we always… I have never seen a guy who is talking about the Indian paradigm or the paradigm. In our context, paradigm in relation to the X community or the Y community. Even the community-wise is different. Even the same local dialect, the practice from the Muslim, the practice from the Christian, the Muslim, the Sikhs are different. They perceive different the same thing, you know. So, we have never designed the ethnic difference in the, you know, in the perception of the same thing. And we try to put in everything in one way or the other, you know. There is another big issue which I think which needs to be addressed. And it is not a simple issue. It needs a lot of effort. And I think me and Dr. Brijesh had discussed a number of times this issue. He said let us put somebody and let somebody does it. That is all. We never went beyond that, I think. It is a good thing to understand, but it is not easy to do it. Actually, it gets related to the phenomenon of an operator and a machine. The same machine can be used differently by two operators. And the two operators behave differently if the machine is different. Our psychology changes when we switch over from tablet to desktop. And if I use a tablet and a kid uses a tablet, the user is different. So, here the brain, the structure is similar. What differences are made by how a person uses it? How do I use my brain? So, then what are the effects of the, say there is a patient or there is a person. You are imaging it. The psychology of the person, I mean the earlier psychology. How does that react? The current things whatever you are trying to do. So, this also comes into question. In fact, I can see a beauty in what you are saying. Say, like most of the construct in psychology in terms of quantification. Majority of them are always concerned psychologists who try to put it on a scale. So, you have a variable degree. Now, if I look at MRI data, I find that say area X of the brain is right now lit and therefore, I consider that this is area responsible for this task. Now, when you have a variable intensity, is it that the same area is involved or is it that some corresponding area also gets involved? And most of our psychological processes cannot be completely compartmentally removed from associated functions. Like say, if I am experiencing an emotion and if you are say looking at the intensity of my emotion, my emotion by default will have some cognitive appraisal of the experience. The feedback that I get. I am happy I express my happiness and if my surrounding is not appreciating my reflection of happiness, I will calm down. So, there would be no emotion itself for example, even though I am mapping the intensity, will be associated with several other functions. So, if I now put it into the model that you are suggesting, then perhaps some great things might come out. Let us say, which MRI research as of now shows that this area. So, there you find out it is not only this, but other associated functions or variable intensity and more than the area that was usually anticipated. One function relates to so many areas of the brain. You have not seen that. Bhashwati has done the FSL analysis, where we have tried to see which areas of the brain are showing a correlation with some of the cognitive functions. And you can see that actually. You can actually see this is a structure. That is automatic. And then you do an ROI analysis. You find this correlation for the same reason. So, that I think you are one of the causes by the way. We submitted the abstract to the RSLA. We did not tell you that we have done all this. So, here there is one question. What about fMRI with humans and fMRI with animals? There are plenty of people. So, because their psychology hopefully is not that complicated. No, people who do like this, all these various models of the animal where they do different kind of commission test, you know, and they do it on MRI. There are a number of people available. So, does it have? Awake and sleep and all kind of things. They do all kind of things. I think certain things. Say, for example, motor activity, for example. Motor, no issue. Or, say, sleep, eating behavior. Yeah. Sixth behavior. Many behaviors, you know, which are common. Repetitiveness. Repetitiveness. So, many behavior, these behavior, you can still make a comparison. But higher cognitive functions. No, higher. Sir, I also have a related question. I will try to put it as best as possible. My question is about dynamic systems. For example, the usual paradigm that we develop in measuring, say, memory. We are measuring some point of the memory. For example, we are asking the person to recall a word and when he recalls the word, maybe you can measure that entire process. But what about the entire dynamics? From the time that he is asked to recall it till the time that he actually recalls it. That actually can be an entire dynamic system. That we cannot assess at this point in time. Because we do not have temporality. We do not look at the temporality. We are looking at few seconds. It does not take few seconds to think. What you have just not told me, it does not take few seconds to think. So, that is something which the resolution and the temporality, both are lacking. I mean, this is just a very crude tool to begin with. I will say that. And if you feel something, if you feel happy, something is happening. What is the real truth? We will know maybe in the next avatar or something. I will say that. That is my and Dr. Rathore, the other end of the story. So, we may gradually get into that kind of moment. But certainly, what you said is absolutely correct. I mean, I am with you on this. What we are seeing is not real truth. But something is being said. Something is being done. And you feel happy about what you can understand today. And tomorrow the same thing becomes, you know, like, you know, something which you should go further on. That is how people make interest in science. Do new things, develop new things.