 Welcome to the talk on understanding human behavior using neuropsychology as a paradigm and neuroscience as an approach. The idea behind taking up this talk is to understand human behavior using a neuroscientific approach. We all believe that understanding human behavior is very easy, but in fact the science of human behavior is very strong based on certain scientific assumptions. One such assumption lies on the parameters based on neuroscientific approach. I will talk about this neuroscientific approach to the understanding of human behavior primarily with the notion related to cognition. And thereafter critically discussing that why neuroscientific approaches are good to understand human behavior for an objective assessment regarding what really happens at the highest center of the brain when a behavior is executed. Remember there are various other approaches as well. The idea of taking up this notion is not to nullify the other approaches. The idea here is to delineate the relevance, the criticalities of neuroscientific approaches in the understanding of human behavior. I would like to talk in terms of a broad perspective of all sciences that try to understand human behavior. It is not psychological science which is only devoted to the understanding of human behavior. There are various other sciences also contribute to the understanding of human behavior. If you try to have a look it at how many sciences are contributing to the understanding of human behavior, you will find that two major groups are responsible for it. One group of sciences relate to hard sciences which are genetic, biological, chemical and artificial. These hard sciences give us very objective notion about how a behavior is formed, executed in the human system. Genetic system tells us what are the inherited properties of our behavior. Biological system tells us how such behavior are expressed through a biological system. Political sciences tell us how such chemical reactions, geochemical reactions take place when a particular behavior is executed. And artificial neural network or mathematical sciences tell us how can we understand the simplest or the rudimentary part of a behavior through the understanding of mathematical sciences. On the other hand some of the social scientific approaches also try to understand human behavior they include social science as such, cultural sciences, anthropological sciences, developmental sciences, ecological sciences and psychological sciences. These social scientific approaches try to understand behavior how it is embedded into a context or a social context. The cultural subsystem, the anthropological route, the developmental channels, the ecological perspective, the social perspective and the psychological context all contribute to human behavior. My approach here would be to understand using understand human behavior using some kind of psychological system with inputs drawn from primarily biological system. And to do that we are not going to talk about all kinds of human behavior we would primarily concentrate on cognitive behavior. Because other than cognitive we have got effective behavior we have got behavior that are executed through our motor systems we will not talk about those systems. Here our effort would be to understand cognition or cognitive behavior using a neuroscientific approach. Well, before we enter into cognitive neuroscience it is important that we understand cognition what do we mean by cognition. Cognition is basically a science that deals with how a information is registered, how an information is processed and how an information is retrieved. In a rather bookish term it is a science that investigates the representation of and the processing of information by animal and human being. In fact, cognitive science has its root in animal sciences and in comparative psychology as well. So the representation and the processing of information is the primary area where cognitive science works. We believe that any information that is registered depends on how we represented internally. The same object may have several forms of representation in our brain. An apple is represented in various forms in a person's brain. One may perceive an apple with a red color, one may perceive an apple with a yellow color, one may perceive a bigger apple, one may perceive an apple with some context when he first got an apple from somebody and one may actually try to represent it through certain reinforcement paradigms. So how it is processed and internally represented is one of the major issue of cognition. When whenever they are represented they do not stay as it is. Any input that comes to our brain undergoes some form of transformation. That is the representation changes after some time and that change takes place based on our kind of experience that we have. So any mental representation that we have actually undergoes transformation. That transformation takes place at a biological as well as biochemical levels. Therefore the transformation in cognitive process we say that it has got a neural basis. Based on the neural basis the transformation actually takes place. And finally the whole transformation with a neural backdrop is done at the highest center of the brain. Therefore cognition has a relevance greatly with the brain sciences which we actually term as cognitive neuroscience. Therefore under cognitive neuroscience as a subject matter we talk about the structure and signal of nervous system for explaining any cognitive function. That is any kind of information processing that takes place at the neural level and how they are represented, how they are transformed and how ultimately they are retrieved through a cognitive system is the subject matter where cognitive science deals with it primarily. So the questions coming up under cognitive science is basically a science with information processing capability where any information that is transformed in a formation is just not a random input. So any input that reaches brain and transformed in some kind of formation becomes information. All kinds of information are not registered automatically and transformed and processed. So the patterning of the input in some formation is basically a cognitive science where we try to understand how these inputs are acquired and interpreted because we do not take up or acquire all kinds of information in the brain and then interpret it. How they are stored and modified? How we use those information to manipulate and to predict? How we use information to execute a behavior and how such behavior are executed or utilized to communicate to another person? These are the basic questions in cognitive processes. So under cognitive process, we try to understand the whole area of questions right from how it is acquired to interpreted, stored, modified, manipulated, executed and how they are utilized for communication purposes. I will give you now what are the constituents of a cognition because in order to answer for these questions, we must know how a particular behavior is executed through different array or different steps in cognition. As I said that any input, the registration of it, the processing it of and the retrieval put together is called cognition. But that is elements view about what cognition is. When we try to translate cognition into certain steps, the fourth step comes here is in the form of sensation. That is until and unless we accept some kind of energy through our sense organ, the cognition cannot start. Any energy that is not accepted within our system cannot actually either be represented, transformed or utilized for making some kind of behavior through communication system. Now, after we accept a particular energy which is termed as sensation, we try to interpret energy. However, we accept many energies, but we do not try to interpret all kinds of energies. Now, interpretation of energy is a very important concept which we call perception. Now, until and unless we perceive those energy, they becomes redundant and do not come to our system following a meaningful way. Now, when we interpret a energy, we find that all energies are also not interpreted. Like all energies are not accepted either through gastric channel or visual channel or auditory channel or tactile channel. All energies are not accepted likewise all energies are not interpreted because our perception is primarily guided by certain attentional factors. We cannot actually attend to everything, we have limited capacities. So, we filter those mechanisms through our cognitive system which we call as attention and these perceptions the interpretation of energy gets guided by attention. After we attend to it, we try to store the material through memory because until and unless we store it, we have to learn that material every day. Therefore, attended material when it is stored, it becomes memory. There can be any kind of memory, it can go into our long term memory which we never forget, rarely forget, it can go into a short term memory which remains within our system for short period or it can be of any kind. After we store it, we actually try to utilize it through a process because the storing process is important through learning because if we do not store that energy, we may have to learn the same thing every day. Now, if I learn how to thread a needle, I remember it and if I fail to remember it, I will have to learn it every day. Therefore, memory and learning are very important linkages. After we learn it, we understand that the learning process itself helps us in solving various kinds of problems because learning as a component help us problem solving problem in our day to day life because if we fail to solve problem, learning becomes meaningless. Now, this problem solving and learning as an approach is possible through our intelligence which is our basic capability based on which we take decisions into our day to day life. And these intelligence in turn are also affected by some kind of our emotional inputs which modifies our cognitive system. So, apart from affect, all other steps right from sensation to intelligence actually are different constituents of cognition. And when we study cognitive science, we actually study them as a process, as a whole or we study its unitary concept at various level of sensation, perception, attention, memory, learning, problem solving and intelligence. Now, we should try to understand what are the two major models to understand cognition. Now, cognition as a science has its origin in behavioral science, but both mathematical science as well as neuroscience has their own models to understand it. The mathematical science actually is based on connectivistic model. This model is a computational approach which examines how simple processing units are connected together towards a network of complex understanding. So, the mathematical processes to understanding cognition, the whole process try to understand the unitary concepts in cognition and how they are linked in a certain process which mathematically if we can calibrate would be able to tell that how such networks develop. While the mathematical approach is to understand the minimum unit of our understanding right from understanding or acceptance of energy to the higher level of processing of decision making. The cognitive neuroscience process deals with the structure and signal of the nervous system for explaining such kind of behavior. What kind of signals we generate in the brain when we accept such energy, how we interpret it, how we represent it and how we transform it at the highest center of the brain which is dealt with by cognitive neuroscience model. So, these are the two major models which try to understand cognition. One has got a basis in mathematical science, other has a basis in the biological science to understand the outcome of a process called cognition which has got its root in behavioral science. So, you understand that how cognitive science is a science has a derivative from behavioral science, from mathematical science as well as from biological sciences. I would like to now tell you that how brain and behavior is related and what are the different neuroscientific method because my attempt here it be to understand using cognitive neuroscience model rather than connectivistic model. Now, when we try to understand cognition from brain and behavior perspective we have three models in hand these three models try to understand human behavior through different process and perspectives. One is a localization model, one is called a regionalization model and one is called a lateralization model. Now, I would try to explain each of these models in order to understand human behavior. The localization model has its origin in the deficiency model which started with DAX in 1896 wherein we tried to understand human behavior through a clinical approach and the approach suggest that if there is a lesion, a tumor, a damage in the brain what kind of impairment we are going to get in future. By making a link between the impairment observed and the damage to a given site they are correlated in the localization model and by having that localization model we try to predict which part of the brain is meant for what kind of behavior. The regionalization model is different slightly different from the localization model while localization model says that how one part of the brain is related to one kind of function. The regionalization concept tells that different regions of the brain may be responsible for one kind of behavior or several behaviors may also be located in one part of the brain. So in regionalization model we try to understand what are the different regions that get activated when a mental function is there. So localization model is primarily utilized in brain damage cases and thereby making an inference between a cognitive behavior and a particular impairment. Regionalization model primarily deals with the intact brain subjects where we try to understand that when a particular mental function is executed what are the different regions that get activated. Now these activations are studied through different mechanisms which I will be telling you shortly and thereafter a model comes which is called lateralization model. The lateralization model is neither a purely localized model at a given site nor a regionalization model which considers the whole brain into account. Lateralization model actually says that which part of the brain is meant for what kind of behavior like left brain has got different kind of behaviors which are executed cognitive behavior right kind right side of the brain is meant for different kind of cognitive behavior and how they are executed. So lateralization is a concept which deals with left brain as well as right brain and it uses both clinical model as well as experimental model while regionalization utilizes primarily an experimental model and while localization utilizes primarily a clinical model. So when we try to understand all three models the clinical approach is primarily as I said executed by localization model. Regionalization and lateralization models are somewhat different regionalization models primarily deal with experimental model the studies are primarily done with intact brain subjects while lateralization is dealing with both clinical cases as well as experimental point of view as well. So when we talk about the experimental paradigm in the understanding of the neuro scientific issues related to brain and behavior there are four kinds of techniques that we have been utilizing. One technique is of course neuro imaging a non-invasive imaging process through functional MRI where we try to understand the oxygenation process in the brain. Whenever there is a mental function the neural signal a neural signal is fired and oxygen is consumed the moment oxygen is consumed and a depletion the nearby capillary is open and they rush to compensate for the oxygen impairment while they are rushed the oxygenated and deoxygenated components within that given area gets identified through a computer scan and process and through a complex statistical analysis we understand that which part of the brain is oxygenated and which part of the brain is deoxygenated. So with this method which is called functional magnetic resonance imaging we understand which regions of the brain get activated when a mental function is occurring. The other approach is a electrophysiological approach which is a age long approaches where we try to understand the electrical activities associated with the brain whenever there is a cognitive function is executed. The behavioral method primarily deals with the lateralization program where we try to understand what kind of mental function or cognitive function is located in which side of the brain the left side as well as the right side and the artificial is basically a mathematical model where we try to understand how a cognitive function is executed I mean how a cognitive function is networked through an array of activities which can be calibrated and calculated through a mathematical process of software. In any case these are all experimental methods this can be done on intact brain subjects the clinical method as I said is primarily a deficiency model not a efficiency model it tells if there is a tumor as you see in this scan what kind of impairment takes place following a particular damage in the particular site. With these methodologies I would now like to tell you this localization, regionalization and lateralization each of these methods had their own advantages and disadvantages. Now advantages are known to us because lateralization helps us very clearly without using sophisticated tools and procedures that how the two sides of the brain functions. One gives us a clear correlation between what kind of damage and what kind of impairment one can very easily calculate that. In regionalization also we understand what are the different regions that are getting activated when a mental function is executed, but each of these methods has its own lacuna. Here I would like to critically discuss how these methodologies suffer from different kind of difficulties because that will give us a comparative understanding of how the two or how the three approaches differ and how they are complementary to each other. For example in localization the challenge is that there are various kind of challenges one such challenge is that the very assumption that the correlation there is a correlation between a specific impairment and a focal brain is not sufficient to infer the normal brain functions. In fact from an impairment we are trying to talk about the efficiency or the performance of a given particular area. So the correlation between a specific impairment and a focal brain is not sufficient may not be sufficient to infer the normal functions. It may be taken over by other sides of the brain which we do not know. In clinical and the localization method we simply say that after this damage there is a set of impairment. So that particular side must be related in a intact brain for such kind of behavior which may not be true it may not be sufficient. Likewise a lesion when it is studied within a brain in a localization model is unlikely to be restricted in a well delineated modular unit and may create disturbance in other parts. I may be having a tumor in the frontal lobe, but the pressure may be created somewhere back in my temporal lobe or may be frontal temporal lobe, may be in the occipital lobe. So functionally the changes may occur where the pressure is created rather than where it is physically limited to. Therefore it is very important to understand that when we refer about a lesion in terms of a site and size they may not be restricted to a well delineated modular unit and they may actually create disturbance in various other parts which are physically not possible for us to see. And it is also possible that there may be more than one areas for a given psychological function in the brain. The very hypothesis that there is a one to one relationship between one part of the brain with one kind of psychological function may not be true. It is possible that various psychological functions are located in one part of the brain and it is also possible that various parts of the brain are actually required to execute one kind of mental function. As of now we do not have a very clear notion that whether brain is distributed both by some form of equipotentiality or some form of localization or not. So that is a very difficult area where cognitive neuroscience find it difficult to understand mental function through localization paradigm. Finally, it is also there that a intact hemisphere in a damaged brain which we find in a localization model if there is a damage in the right brain the left brain may be intact. But there is no reason to believe that a intact hemisphere in a damaged brain can operate as it does in a intact brain. I meant to say that if the left hemisphere is intact in a damaged brain we should not presume that the left hemisphere will function normally because in a damaged brain the whole system may be damaged. So localization as a system localization as an approach to the understanding of cognitive aspects of a human function or a human behavior has its own disadvantages. But it has got its own advantages as well which I have talked to. I will now talk about the regionalization as a critical notion. Regionalization is also having its own disadvantages has its own challenges. It is possible that different regions of the brain participate together in a specific function. So the point that there is one region for one function or there may be different functions located in one particular region applies to regionalization hypothesis as well. Likewise determining what a brain is doing when it is activated is also not known. Activation means what is not interpreted we only know there is an activation. Now whether it is due to some form of excitation or some form of inhibition we are not very sure. It is not very clear that if I get activation whether my efficiency is referred by some form of activation or not. If a person is doing very well in mathematics will he get more activation or if a person is finding it difficult to do a mathematics will he get more activation. Activation per se refers to what is it excitation or inhibition is also not very clear. We get activation we know there is a processing going on. But the activation per se does not refer whether it is part of the excitation process or inhibition process. Likewise regions may be critical for a particular operation but the operation itself arises from combined action of many regions. The region that we finally home in for a given function that we try to understand or link it with a particular behavior. But the point is that before the activation takes place the entire operation may arise from different other sections of the brain which may not have been activated at that point of time. So regions may be critical for a particular operation but the operation the processing itself arises may arise from a combined action of many regions. And finally a region can participate in a function but may not be critical for its expression. Now this is very important you get an activation in a given region but that region may not be critical for the expression a different region may be a critical for that it is only finally executed by a particular region for which you are getting the activation therefore it is very important to understand that cognitive function per se and the regional activation they may not be directly related in a one to one matter manner. Likewise we have certain challenges for lateralization paradigms also. In lateralization paradigm unlike regionalization or localization these are mostly computer generated methodologies where we have two major or three major techniques which are called split visual field technique where we try to understand how the two sides of the brain process visual information. We have got a dichotic listening technique where we try to understand which side of the brain process what kind of a caustic information. And we have a dicaptic method where we try to understand which side of the body kinetically process what kind of information. These techniques are behavioral techniques basically they are done for intact brain subjects technique but they have got their own difficulties as well because some such techniques are not centrally executed that is they do not involve any central nervous system or processing per se. There are certain peripheral mechanisms also wherein we try to understand which side of the brain is activated for what kind of function. For example, if we are right handed we presume that the left brain is dominant for that particular person. If somebody is purely left handed or left footer we try to presume that probably the person is more right sided. Such kind of peripheral measures are also utilized but more often to draw a conclusion about the brain involvement in lateralization pattern through the study of cerebral hemisphericity. We generally utilize split visual field technique which I am showing it here as a technique wherein the two sides of the visual field left visual field and the right visual field they are stimulated with some kind of visual stimuli. And we try to understand that which side of the stimuli is actually processed by which side of the brain normally the stimuli are presented in less than 200 milliseconds. So that there is no saccadic eye movement before that and the information is not exchanged from one side of the brain to another side of the brain. With this paradigm we try to understand with a presentation of visual stimuli at the two visual field left visual field and right visual field in less than 200 millisecond. We try to understand which side of the brain is processing what kind of information. The other technique is called dichotic listening technique in which the two sides of the the two ears are simultaneously stimulated at the same temporal point. Thereby trying to understand whether there is a interference or a facilitation or whether there is a greater advantage of processing of one side of the brain over the another side on the processing of a caustic stimuli. This methodology was devised by Doreen Kimura a scientist long back is a excellent technique through which we can understand the cerebral hemispiricity. When the two sides of the brain or the two ears are simultaneously stimulated at the same temporal point the ipsilateral pathways are inhibited the contralateral pathways are facilitated. Therefore if we get two different noises or two different lexical stimuli at two different ears the ear the side which is dominant for processing a particular lexical stimuli gives gets a priority in terms of processing. Like A and B if the two ears are stimulated with two different alphabets the one that is presented at the right ear gets an access over the one that is presented in the left ear because generally the left hemisphere is more dominant in the processing of lexical stimuli. In the lateralization paradigm though these paradigms are relatively easier to execute there are certain disadvantages in it as well. For example these are indirect measures of brain function they are not direct measures like regionalization there is a direct measure of brain function or in localization we directly understand that a particular part of the brain is damaged. Here in lateralization paradigm we do not get any such input it is a indirect measure. It is also a challenge the understanding that the brain function is a clear linear process that is left will get the access to right side and right will get access to left side there is no such linear relationship. Brain functions are often non-linear so therefore a clear cut linear relationship a correlation cannot actually tell about which side of the brain is performing what kind of information. The non-laterality account of some of the observed performance asymmetries is not generally taken care of. The some observed performance at asymmetries are not clearly understood through lateral paradigms everything cannot be understood through a laterality paradigm. There are activities in the brain which are not lateralized clearly. So to understand such behaviors other than the motor behavior for example the higher order complex mental processes are not fully lateralized. In fact the rudimentary behaviors the more rudimentary the behavior is greater there is a chance that there are lateralization. But higher centers of the brain or the higher complex mental processes cognitive processes are not lateralized to that extent. And it allows inferences only about inter hemispheric effects it does not talk about anything else than other than understanding a relationship between a particular cognitive process and a particular side of the brain. There are computer modeling also as I said in the experimental modeling the artificial neural network also comes into picture AI comes also into picture other than the brain sciences. But they also face different kind of challenges. The cognitive scientist use computers to actually simulate cognitive processes it is possible that in computer we can simulate such process. But in simulation the way computer represents and process information is totally specified though the outcome is not known in advance everything is specified. So that specificity that linearity that sequentiality does not explain fully the parallel processing capacity of the human brain. In fact cognitive processing is not only sequential they are parallel as well that parallel understanding is not fully possible for us to represent through some form of softwares which AI as a methodology artificial intelligence as a methodology tries to develop. So the critical issues what it is coming up that in cognitive neuroscience we utilize biological system biological signals to interpret our cognitive behavior while mathematical science try to understand how the network is created. In behavioral science we try to understand behavior at a macro level rather than at a micro level as I said the hard sciences the biological sciences the genetic sciences the biochemical sciences the artificial sciences they all try to understand human behavior or cognitive behavior at a very micro level. But behavioral science has their own approaches at a very macro level the problem is that the understanding at a micro level as well as a macro level to what the understanding of human behavior are generally treated as mutually exclusive they are never taken into consideration in some kind of relationship the micro level understanding is done separately the macro level understandings are also done separately. As a result what happens the behavioral scientists view biological sciences as useless reductionism that at a molecular level if we try to understand the human behavior ultimately we get to understand what changes are happening at the molecular level does not have any correlation what behavior is executed at a holistic manner. And even if that behavior is executed under what circumstances what are the context what are the social ecological developmental and other issues which bring in changes into human behavior and not at all understood in the reductionistic approach. While biologists view that social sciences is nothing they cannot tell anything about cause effect relationship of a human behavior. So, they are simply a history of human experience they simply talk about human experience of that the behavior is executed they talk only about the experience that the human being has actually gone through. So, there is a difficulty here in the understanding of cognitive science as a whole where the macro sciences as their own approaches the micro sciences as their own approaches cognitive neuroscience is a science where we try to bridge the gap by examining the bio behavioral subsystem within the environment under cognitive neuroscience we not only look at a molecular level or at a signal level of the brain what kind of changes are occurring. But how these changes are also getting correlated with a given context with a given backdrop or with a behavioral subsystem within the environment is also looked after. So, cognitive neuroscience does not exclusively depend on a biological model or a reductionistic model it actually takes into account both the models into account. So, the challenges of cognitive neuroscience is therefore, in order to understand since we have now integrated our approaches and tried to understand human behavior through cognitive system through a overall process it is now time to understand that how cognitive neuroscience should progress. Now, it is important to understand the technology integration across all levels of analysis that is I will get input from localization model I will get input from regionalization as well as lateralization model. And using experimental model we get input from neuroimaging sciences we get input from electrophysiological sciences we get input from behavioral sciences we get input from artificial and neural sciences the question is that how do we integrate those how do we integrate this technological input in a overall analysis to understand holistically cognitive science cognitive behavior as a whole. Then the question comes even if we understand the applicability of all such techniques and understanding on the overall course of development is a very important phenomenon as I said to understand any behavior five cornerstones are utilized one is a theoretical biological developmental cultural and statistical. So, the question comes the developmental train that is after theoretical biological we must understand that how cognitive development takes place and at every stage of the development how this technique and technological integration can be done is a big challenge for cognitive neuroscience. Then comes the issue of cognitive neuroscience the major trouble they are facing with the extent of individual difference now human to know no two human beings are seen neither two human beings are altogether different the extent of human difference has never been calibrated one of the major problem with cognitive sciences is that if we treat every individual as a different individual developing a notion about cognition in an as a whole is a very difficult ask for a different process and not only that within the same individual the cognitive system or the cognitive process changes over a stage over a period. So, a child who is of six years of age when he develops reaches at 20 years of age his cognitive system will undergo a great change when he reaches 60 years of age his cognitive system will also undergo change. So, it is not only between the two individuals the extent of individual difference that will create difficulty for us to understand cognitive neuroscience it is also within the same individual the cognitive system subsystem that changes over a period of development is also a difficult thing to understand also it is important to understand for us what does the resting brain is I mean understanding of the resting brain. Because as you see all models either localization regionalization or lateralization as a model they can be utilized whenever the brain has some function or the brain is doing something or the brain has got some aberration or some problem. In a intact resting brain we have no study method to understand it what the brain is doing at a resting state. So, the understanding of the resting state of a brain is never attempted in any time therefore it would be a challenge for cognitive neuroscience also to understand resting brain the acting brain or the damaged brain or the impaired brain or the active brain there are models to understand it, but there is no such model to understand the resting brain finally reaching beyond the academic discipline and then actually understanding on ground how cognition takes place is not happening in cognitive neuroscience it still remain within the theoretical backdrop it still remain within the domain of science and technology it has not come out of the academic discipline. The deliverability of the discipline in different forms of sciences or different walks of life is still to be done that is a big challenge for cognitive neuroscience it remain a subject within a discipline with it certain textbook within certain research group. The deliverability of this cognitive neuroscience in order to understand for example how the aging takes place nowadays lot of studies are being done with the understanding of cognitive neuroscience what the mind does for example how the mind edits a particular environment how the mind edits when we have a developmental thinking process. But as of now is we are still within the academic discipline the deliverability out of this discipline to every walk of life to the understanding of a human disease system is still a far reaching issue that we must be able to address. Therefore within the domain of behavioral science now I would like to tell which does not require other forms of hardware technologies the testing as a paradigm we need to understand how neuropsychological testing can be utilized to understand cognitive neuroscience. One of the major challenges to do some kind of testing based on simulation that can we simulate a situation to a perfect normal condition or a perfect reality condition into a laboratory environment and then study it for example in virtual reality. Can we create such kind of virtual reality in the laboratory set up in order to understand how actually cognition takes place in real situation because until and unless we understand them under a controlled condition we would never be able to understand the cause effect relationship. Likewise test construction for some kind of non specific behavior within the domain of cognitive neuroscience is also a challenge. The behavior which is non specific for example understanding the resting brain is a non specific behavior which is not executed under certain condition. How do we understand it through our normal psychometric process like neuropsychological testing for extreme environment when the brain is acting or performing under a extreme condition for example in space for example in very high altitude for example in a condition where the pressure is very high for example in a condition when the temperature goes beyond 50-52 degree temperature. What kind of cognitive impairment takes place under certain extreme condition and how do we assess them through neuropsychological testing in order to understand cognition at extreme environment is a challenge. Likewise it is also important to understand how technology invariant testing procedure can be done that different kind of different ways other than the laboratory based ways how can we test a person under different condition is also a challenge. And we should also try to understand that cognition is a generic process but it has also got its cultural input and cultural specificities. Can we devise certain test technique which are cross cultural neuropsychologically based paradigm issues that is cross cultural neuropsychology is a subject matter where the general the generic the experimentally tested cognitive issues are seen in certain culturally sensitive or contextual areas. So can we develop some kind of neuropsychological testing which is culturally sensitive to that is a challenge. So cross cultural neuropsychology can give us some input for tomorrow's neuropsychological testing paradigms. For understanding cognitive science in a bigger way for people who would like to do research in the area of cognitive science a varieties of areas are today in front of us. We can study what are the different styles of cognition which is cognitive style whether the person is field dependent or a field independent for example who can identify a camouflaged object better. We know that field dependent cognitive style people fail to do it while a field independent person can do it very effectively. So cognitive science as a behavioral domain and cognitive style as a paradigm generated out of behavioral science can be utilized to do cognitive science research. Cognitive decision making how a decision is taken. Metacognition the cognition of cognition is another area of research which can go beyond a particular existing paradigm and behaviorally we can try to understand cognitive science through metacognitive paradigms. Cognitive profiling that is right from sensation perception to attention to memory to learning to intelligence to problem solving to concept formation. How I can profile a person at all levels it is possible that some people are good in memory but others are good in learning others are good in concept formation but not in other areas of the cognitive processes. So, how can I create a profile of cognition for a given person. Cognitive regulation is another area how can I regulate under difficult conditions our cognitive system. Cognitive engineering based on machine designings are done that how a machine is designed based on our cognitive capability, cognitive multiscaling that is how many cognitive skills we can perform at one time keeping our secondary resource intact. Because in cognitive multiscaling we do not exhaust all our resources while we execute brain resources while we execute a task. If too many tasks are being done and the resources are depleted there would be interferences. But to what extent what is the threshold what are the benchmarking for doing some form of cognitive multiscaling is a different area of research. Cognitive failure why simple cognitive failure takes place under different conditions. When simple cognitive failure becomes too costly we can understand that process. Cognitive aberrations under certain diseased conditions is also a possibility there are several cognitively oriented disorders in mental functions which we study under cognitive clinical paradigm. Cognitive rehabilitations how we can rehabilitate a person restructure a person's cognition how we can retrain them through some kind of guided imagery. It has been found that cognitive disturbances can be overcome with some kind of guided imagery and cultural cognition how it different cultures the cognitions take place. Because every culture has its own way of looking at things we all believe that we have a free will the way we want to think we can think. Actually culture gives us a shape to the particular thinking process that thinking process which is part of the cognitive system is guided largely by a stream of thought which is generated out of cultural orientation. So, cultural cognition is another area. So, the challenges behind before us that can we do cognitive processing for indirect display is a latest area of research. How do we lose situational awareness under a cognitive extreme cognitive condition? What kind of image processing that we can do in an unusual environment can we create a virtual environment of extreme situation and then can we image the brain. Otherwise, we have to image the brain in a resting state with or some kind of state within the magnet, but the question is it possible to do some kind of non-invasive imaging under certain virtual reality condition. Cognitive restructuring under environmental extreme environmental condition, cognitive engineering for high tech system. There are as I all know that in a high tech system the cognition has to have a reshaping. How we reshape our cognitive system? How we metacognize ourselves in high tech system is an interesting area of research. And simple cognitive failure in suboptimal condition are certain challenges which we if we can execute the greatest difficulty of cognitive neuroscience as a theoretical subdiscipline can be overcome. Because the implementability of such research, the deliverability of such research will be full proof when we understand such kind of cause of a relationship and then see it under a given condition. Thank you so much for giving attention to it.