1
Opportunities for advancing interdisciplinary collaborations
between the USA and Spain through the CRCNS program
Report of a Binational Workshop
Madrid, Spain 15
th
-16
th
of February 2018
Adrienne Fairhall
1
and Javier Martín Buldú
2
A binational workshop was held in Madrid in February 2018 in order to gauge the interest
in and feasibility of extending the CRCNS program to include interactions between the US
and Spain. The workshop aimed to assess the potential interest among the scientific
community and the funding agencies in such a joint venture, to evaluate areas of common
and complementary strengths, to identify particular opportunities for interactions and
student experiences, and to discuss broader issues that may affect collaborations between
potentially distinct scientific cultures. We assembled a group of 6 US and 10 Spanish
scientists (Appendix 1) for a two-day workshop that consisted of scientific exchange and
discussion groups (Appendix 2). The meeting successfully established a line of
communication between Spanish and US scientists and gave the opportunity to share
scientific interests, to better understand the scientific strengths of the two communities and
to discuss issues of environment. Discussions among scientists showed that there is
considerable interest and a fruitful ground for interdisciplinary collaborations among
scientists and engineers in the two countries.
The state of interdisciplinary neuroscience in Spain
Theoretical and computational approaches to neuroscience are on a firm footing in Spain,
with a significant community of researchers using mathematical and statistical methods to
analyse network behaviors and brain structure. These researchers have extensive
backgrounds in the physical, statistical and computational sciences. Particular areas of
strength include statistical approaches to neural networks and the dynamics of networks
and plasticity. There is also an active field of graphical network analysis extending to
neuroinformatic analyses of cortical networks. Many theoretical researchers already have
active collaborations with experimentalists within Spain and further afield. Further, there
are a number of highly quantitative experimentalists. Barcelona has a particularly strong
concentration with a special focus on the study of complexity, including neuroscience
applications. Furthermore, several prominent US scientists have already established links
and collaborations in Spain.
The workshop highlighted a number of areas in which collaboration is already occurring
and can be further enhanced. A common theme between Spain and US participants was the
understanding of emergent properties of complex networks. Several groups in Spain focus
on the importance of criticality and emergent network properties that affect global state (as
presented by Profs. Deco and Sanches-Vives, Appendix 2) and the ability of the network to
1
Department of Physiology and Biophysics, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
2
Center for Biomedical Technology, Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, Madrid, Spain
Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this report are those of the
workshop participants and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Spanish State Research Agency
(AEI), the National Institute of Health Carlos III (ISCIII, Spain), the National Science Foundation (NSF,
USA), or the National Institutes of Health (NIH, USA).
2
propagate weak signals (Parga). The experimental studies of Sanchez-Vives and Deco on
spontaneous and driven global brain activity are supported by whole-brain modeling that
make predictions about response to perturbation. At a more local scale, Yuste’s work has
demonstrated that cortical activity patterns can act as attractors and be dynamically created
by optogenetic inputs. Several theoretical approaches to network analysis were presented
that may provide important tools to understand these observed activity patterns, including
Buldú’s analysis of dynamics and synchronization in complex networks and Makse’s
application of percolation theory to discover key network nodes. Bielza’s work on graphical
Bayesian models has already found applications in collaborations with de Felipe’s
anatomical studies of dendritic branching patterns and would be a natural approach to
analyse large-scale EM structural data. Several groups’ work elucidates the identification
(de Felipe) and computational role (Geffen, Sanchez-Vives, Yuste) of different neuron types.
The climate for extending the reach of interdisciplinary approaches is fertile.
Multidisciplinary approaches are well-accepted and broadly under way in this field in Spain,
as the speakers’ range of existing local and international collaborations demonstrated.
However, it is not yet the case that personnel undertaking theoretical and analytical
approaches are typically incorporated into neuroscience groups or departments, as has
become more common in the US. For example, there is currently no theoretical/analytical
group at the Cajal Institute, a major neuroscience center in Madrid, although a number of
members do collaborate with theoretical colleagues at other institutes. In terms of academic
culture, it was noted that research in the domain of computational neuroscience is generally
better supported in Spanish computer science departments, with particular strengths in
network analysis, than in physics departments which remain fairly traditional. In general,
the area has gotten more traction in newer departments rather than more long-established
ones. Working across departmental boundaries within institutions remains a barrier, so
that currently there is not as much interaction between theoretical and experimental
groups as is desirable.
Domains that would particularly benefit from the CRCNS program include data science and
machine learning, which is growing in popularity among students and researchers in Spain
as in the US and is an opportunity for recruitment and training of students in this area.
Brain-computer interfaces (BCI) are also an area of active student interest, particularly
noninvasive BCIs. Neurotechnology, including BCIs, is relatively nascent in Spain and could
be significantly enhanced through international collaboration.
Within Spain, there is specific interest in and room for further growth in computational
neuroscience and neural engineering. Dr Rafael Yuste noted plans for invited visits to
several institutions in the Basque Country in early 2018, including the Brain Center on
Cognition, Brain and Language, Nanogune, Biofisika, BioDonostia and the Donostia
International Physics Center (DIPC) to give a lecture course in neurophysics. It is possible
that interactions like this will lead to a new short course in neuroengineering. Further,
industrial and medical collaborations are possible: Dr Jose Carmena discussed experiences
from his existing collaboration with the Hospital Universitario Donostia in San Sebastiàn
that is hosted and partially funded by Tecnalia, a local industry incubator.
3
3
https://www.tecnalia.com/en/
3
Current funding mechanisms
MINECO is the leading funding organization in Spain, with grants that are in the range of
$30-300K over 3 years. They do not include funding for salaries, as these are covered by the
institution. Some institutions also supply funding for students. European Union funding
supports two relevant large flagship projects, the Human Brain Project, and GRAPHENE, a
nanotechnology project. It was perceived among the workshop participants that Spanish
funding policy and mechanisms are slanted toward the support of bigger groups.
Computational neuroscience groups tend to be small which disadvantages them in a
number of national and European funding mechanisms. Thus a program like CRCNS could
serve to address this gap.
Student training
There is considerable potential for teaching and growth in computational neuroscience
training. It was noted that in Madrid and Barcelona, it could be especially powerful for
institutions to pool offerings and resources to create an interinstitutional program.
Both the US and Spain are very interested in student exchange programs to further training
and research goals. On the Spanish side, the groundwork for student exchange is already in
place. Graduate exchanges are normal: indeed, in some Spanish doctoral programs, students
are required to spend some months abroad. This is seen as an ideal opportunity for students
to learn and exchange new techniques, both experimental and theoretical. Some university
PhD programs require an international component such that students spend some time in
another country, including the US. Further, there exist IBRO fellowships to support one-year
exchanges for very recent graduates.
4
Considerable value was also seen in US students
undertaking research experiences in Spain, to help advance their maturity, collaborative
skills and understanding of the broader international research environment.
Intellectual property and the climate for commercialization
The group discussed the opportunities available in both countries for developing
intellectual property into companies. This was regarded as a fairly difficult process in Spain.
Universities provide guidance but no seed funding, but do assist with filing patents. It was
agreed that from experience, while patents may in the end not mean much, nascent
companies find them necessary to have in place to secure funding. As in the US, there is a
diversity of rules about intellectual property in universities around Spain. In some cases,
the IP belongs to the university. Converting from a provisional to a full patent is expensive
and the university may not see the process through. That said, the experiences of attendees
suggest that the culture is changing to offer more support for entrepreneurship. In some
places, one can take a leave of absence for such efforts, although one cannot continue to be
funded by grants on this leave. Sometimes a company may provide funding to a lab to work
on an idea, although students generally cannot work on industry-related projects.
Importantly, in general, there appear to be no aggressive intellectual property controls in
place that would serve as a barrier to international collaboration.
4
IBRO Research Fellowships,
http://funding.ibro1.info/Pub/Pub_Main_Display.asp?LC_Docs_ID=4254
4
Vertebrate animal experimentation
Vertebrate animal work is in general well-supported by the public in Spain; however, there
is very little research on non-human primates. While it is not banned or even especially
negatively perceived, under European Union-wide regulations, NHPs should only be used
in projects that are considered essential for human health. There would be no cultural
barrier for interactions that involve NHP experimentation.
Data sharing
The question of data sharing generated an active discussion in which a range of diverse
viewpoints were shared. While the principle of data sharing is widely seen as positive, many
caveats were raised and discussed.
Some participants are members of the Human Brain Project, and shared that the HBP
charter contains a chapter of regulations about data sharing, which has raised awareness of
the topic, if not yet assured compliance. Sharing of electrophysiology data in particular is
seen to be highly nontrivial and there are a range of valid objections to the requirement for
immediate sharing, including the need for intensive documentation; documentation
standards that are time-consuming to carry out; the need for embargo periods to allow the
data-generating group to perform a reasonable amount of publishable analysis; and the
question of subsequent authorship on research performed using openly shared data. For
some experiments that are very difficult and time-intensive, a requirement to share
immediately could be perceived as a disincentive to doing the work. It was noted that data
sharing can be complex even within closed collaborations. Finally, some theorists’ had
found that using publically released data can have limited value—it can act as a “teaser” to
initiate a collaboration, but that a new project will generally require the collection of new
data to advance specific questions.
It is generally agreed that a standardized user-friendly platform is required for data sharing
to be as useful as possible. The Human Brain Project is in the process of developing such a
platform, but there is a likely two-year timeframe on its development and evaluation.
Conclusions
This workshop demonstrated that there is a fertile ground, scientifically and culturally, for
cross-disciplinary collaboration in neuroscience between Spanish and US investigators.
Several active collaborations already exist, and specific domains of specialization provide
very appropriate opportunities, in particular in the analysis of complex network dynamics
and emergent behavior, in anatomical and cell type analysis, and in brain-computer
interfaces.
5
Appendix 1: Attendees
Participants
Name
Institution
Country
Javier Martín Buldú
URJC, Madrid
Spain
Gustavo Deco
UPF, Barcelona
Spain
Albert Compte
IDIBAPS, Barcelona
Spain
Luis M. Martínez
Instituto de Neurociencias de
Alicante. CSIC-UMH
Spain
Concha Bielza
UPM, Madrid
Spain
Javier de Felipe
Cajal Institute & CTB, Madrid
Spain
Mavi Sánchez-Vives
IDIBAPS, Barcelona
Spain
Joaquín Marro
Universidad de Granada, Granada
Spain
Pablo Varona
Universidad Autónoma de Madrid,
Madrid
Spain
Néstor Parga
Universidad Autónoma de Madrid,
Madrid
Spain
José Carmena
University of California, Berkeley
USA
Rafael Yuste
Columbia University, New York
USA
Maria Neimark-Geffen
University of Pennsylvania,
Philadelphia
USA
Judith Hirsch
University of Southern California
USA
Hernán Makse
City University, New York
USA
Adrienne Fairhall
University of Washington, Seattle
USA
Government observers
Victoria Ley
AEI, MINECO, Madrid
Spain
Joaquín Serrano
AEI, MINECO, Madrid
Spain
Estrella Fernández
AEI, MINECO, Madrid
Spain
Juan José Garrido
AEI, MINECO, Madrid
Spain
Ana Mª Barra Ahijado
AEI, MINECO, Madrid
Spain
Ignacio Baanante
ISCIII, Madrid
Spain
Esther Chacón
Campollo
AEI, MINECO, Madrid
Spain
Michele Ferrante
NIMH, Washington
USA
Edda Thiels
NSF, Washington
USA
6
Appendix 2: Workshop agenda
The binational workshop was preceded by a scientific symposium held at the Cajal Institute,
Madrid.
PROGRAMME
14 February 2018
16:30 – Welcome and Presentation (Juan José Garrido, Cajal Institute, CSIC, Spain)
15:45 – Rafael Yuste: “Can you see a thought? Neuronal ensembles as basic units of cortical
function”
17:15 – José Carmena: “Mechanisms of neural activity exploration and consolidation
underlying neuroprosthetic skill learning”
17:45 – Maria N. Geffen: “Excitatory-inhibitory circuits in auditory processing”
18:15 – Hernan Makse: “Cracking the locomotion code in C. elegans”
19:15 – End of the Scientific Seminars
AGENDA
15 February 2018
Funders meeting
12:00 – Welcome and introduction of State Research Agency
(Estrella Fernández Head of Subdivision, Subdivision for Horizontal S&T Programmes,
Spanish State Research Agency, AEI)
12: 20 – Presentation of National Science Foundation (Edda Thiels, National Science
Foundation, NSF)
12:40 – Presentation of National Institute of Health (Michele Ferrante, National Institute of
Health, NIH)
13:00 – Wrap-up
Scientific Workshop on CRNCS
13:30 – Welcoming reception at AEI- MINECO
14:15 – Opening by AEI-MINECO / NSF
Introduction to workshop (Dr Javier M. Buldú, Spanish Co-Chair, URJC University and
Adrienne Fairhall, USA Co-Chair, University of Washington)
14:30 – Speed topic presentations I: Self-introduction, summary of research, listing of
opportunities for collaboration. (10 minutes each: 8 presentation + 2 questions)
1) Adrienne Fairhall (University of Washington, Seattle WA)
2) Javier M. Buldú (University Rey Juan Carlos, Madrid)
3) Gustavo Deco (Universidad Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona)
4) Concha Bielza (Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Madrid)
5) José Carmena (UC Berkeley, Berkeley CA)
6) Mavi Sánchez-Vives (Institut d’Investigacions Biomèdiques August Pi i Sunyer
Barcelona),
7) Rafael Yuste (Columbia University, New York)
8) Luis M. Martínez (Instituto de Neurociencias de Alicante, CSIC-UMH, Alicante)
7
16:00 – Coffee break
16:30 – Speed topic presentations II (10 minutes each: 8 presentation + 2 questions)
9) Javier de Felipe (Cajal Institute & CTB, Madrid)
10) Néstor Parga (Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid)
11) Hernán Makse (City University, New York)
12) Albert Compte (IDIBAPS, Barcelona)
13) Joaquín Marro (Universidad de Granada, Granada)
14) Judith Hirsch (University of Southern California, CA)
15) Pablo Varona (Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid)
16) María N. Geffen (University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia)
18:00 – End of Day 1
20:00 – Dinner hosted by MINECO/AEI
16 February 2018
09:30 – Group discussion of goals (Chairs)
09:45 – Parallel working group session I
10:45 – Coffee break
11:00 – Parallel working group session II
12:00 – Joint session: groups report back
Session I
Scientist working group- open discussion
Session II
Funding Agencies working group- open discussion
13:00 – Conclusions and next steps
13:30 – End of meeting
Lunch
