Re: Frequency (2 channel common ref.) or Coherence training (bipolar montage)?

[Guest guest]

Mike,Preferred by whom?  For what?You can get around all these doctrinal questions if you just look at the brain through the window of what the client wants to change.

Is this a client with anger management problems, showing high beta and high-beta on the right-side sites?Or is it someone who is emotionally empty with lots of alpha or slow-wave activity dominating the right side?

To be clear, since this seems to be an area of ongoing confusion, -- When you train a bipolar montage, you are training to increase (reward) or decrease (inhibit) only the DIFFERENCE between the two signals.

-- If you are training synchronous signals--those which come from subcortical generators rather than being produced by cortical neurons--like alpha or synchronous theta or SMR in the sensorimotor cortex--then moving the signals in or out of PHASE (not necessarily " coherence " , which is a measure of the stability of phase relationships) can affect the difference between the two sites.

-- If two alpha signals are in phase (peaks lined up with peaks and troughs with troughs), then the difference between them will be a small number.  If you want to INCREASE the difference, you need to move toward peaks lining up with troughs and vice-versa--DE-synchronizing.

-- Increasing SMR between C3 and C4 could result in the two sites increasing the phase angle between them.-- Training SMR (12-15 Hz) at C4 (which is a thalamically-produced waveform) to become less synchronous with Low Beta (12-15 Hz) at F4, which is a cortically generated signal could be of benefit from the client's point of view.

If you have too much beta/high-beta or too much alpha or too much delta/theta, then training down or up the difference between two sites won't necessarily have any effect at all on what you want to change.  A one or two-channel monopolar montage reducing the target frequency will focus the brain on doing exactly that:  reducing the activity at the target site(s).

If you think you want to increase SMR at a site, first you need to be aware that the easiest way for the brain to do that is by increasing everything, which probably is NOT what you want.  Using a full (or windowed) squash, to block increase in general and then adding a reward in a frequency like SMR may result in SMR becoming a greater percent of the total EEG--whether or not it actually goes up.

Pete-- Van Deusenpvdtlc@...http://www.brain-trainer.com

USA 678 224 5895BR 47 3346 6235The Learning Curve, Inc.

On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 3:40 PM, chiapetfarmer <chiapetfarmer@...> wrote:

 Can someone clear up for me which is the preferred training regimen at locations F4 and C4: 2 active-channel (frequency training), A2 common reference~ F4/A2/Cz(g)/C4/A2 window squash, with 12-15Hz in the window; or 1 Channel Bipolar montage~ F4/C4/A2 rewarding 12-15Hz?

Which is more effective to impact training-the Coherence training in the 1 Channel bipolar montage (with the understanding by training under a bipolar montage you are either increasing or decreasing the 12-15 Hz amplitude but you are increasing the coherence and communication between these sites) or the 2 Active-Channel Windowed squash focusing solely on increasing the 12-15Hz bandwith at these locations?

Thanks!

Mike

[Guest guest]

Pete,

I hope to be as perceived salient (still trying to form a lot of these

concepts): but if I want to increase communication between 2 intra-hemispheric

10-20 locations, wouldn't it best to do some sort of bipolar montage to impact

these " phase " (I stand corrected from coherence) relationships? Where, it might

be perceived doing a windowned-squash as two intra-hemispheric locations might

be similar to the analogy you highlight like " just moving up and down amplitudes

on a trampoline " , kind of just mixing things up sort of impact?

When would it best to do bipolar and when not to do on 2 intrahemispheric

locations? What are the benefits for either? I thought the 2 sites are being

trained for their communication, and bipolar by premise gets the 2 sites to

coordinate, whether its by phase in a synchronous relationship.

My understanding, and please correct me that if I was going to train for

synchrony under a 2 channel monopolar montage I would have to program some sort

of " evaluator " object specifically in the design for BioExplorer and have the 2

sites linked commonly with a jumper?

Mike

>

> > **

> > Can someone clear up for me which is the preferred training regimen at

> > locations F4 and C4: 2 active-channel (frequency training), A2 common

> > reference~ F4/A2/Cz(g)/C4/A2 window squash, with 12-15Hz in the window; or

> > 1 Channel Bipolar montage~ F4/C4/A2 rewarding 12-15Hz?

> >

> >

> > Which is more effective to impact training-the Coherence training in the 1

> > Channel bipolar montage (with the understanding by training under a bipolar

> > montage you are either increasing or decreasing the 12-15 Hz amplitude but

> > you are increasing the coherence and communication between these sites) or

> > the 2 Active-Channel Windowed squash focusing solely on increasing the

> > 12-15Hz bandwith at these locations?

> > Thanks!

> > Mike

> >

> >

> >

>