We surmise that results obtained from the experiments described in this section cannot serve to understand the role of I_NaL in arrhythmogenesis.

1. Van Driessche W, Lindemann B: Amount reliance of currents due to single salt-choosy pores within the frog skin. Nature. 1979; 282 (5738): 519-520 PubMed Abstract | Creator Complete Text

This means new good findings put forward by this manuscript are perhaps not justified and that i try not to accept the manuscript in this means

The brand new article writers provides clarified many of the issues We increased from inside the my personal previous feedback. Unfortuitously, the significant dilemmas have not been handled by this enhance. Once i stated in my personal early in the day review, We deem it impractical that the individuals factors is going to be set only from the a few additional sentences. Alternatively there are specific simple issues for the experimental build and you can, extremely significantly, with the investigation.

It indicates the latest strong results submit from this manuscript is actually perhaps not justified and that i usually do not agree the new manuscript contained in this form

This new people has made clear many of the inquiries We increased inside the my previous opinion. Sadly, every big troubles have not been managed by this enhance. Whenever i stated in my past remark, I deem it impractical that those people facts is going to be set merely by a number of additional paragraphs. Alternatively there are still specific standard concerns with the fresh design and you may, most vitally, for the studies.

• Ideal issue is whenever I followed the latest description out of the methods in the last adaptation it actually was you can in order to decode, which have nearly best reliability, people haphazard stimulus labels We chose. Select getting samples of it reanalysis. It doesn’t matter if we pretend the real stimuli checked on a later on date otherwise is continuously changing ranging from signal and you will quiet, the fresh new decryption is obviously close to finest. This is a sign the decryption doesn’t have anything accomplish to the real stimuli read from the Sender but is opportunistically exploiting some other has on studies. The new control analysis the latest authors performed, reversing brand new stimuli names, you should never address this matter as it is afflicted with the same problem. Basically, exactly what the classifier was allegedly using is the time who’s passed since recording come.
• The main cause of this is certainly presumably the writers made use of low-independent research for studies and you will analysis. Of course, if I’m sure correctly (come across point step three), arbitrary testing half of data examples off an EEG shadow aren’t independent research. Repeated the analysis five times – the fresh control study the fresh people did – is not an adequate answer to address so it concern. At random selecting examples regarding a period series which has sluggish change (such as the slow wave interest one allegedly reigns over these tracks significantly less than these scenarios) tend to invariably include good temporary correlations. Come across TemporalCorrelations.jpg set for 2D thickness histograms and a correlation matrix proving that it.
• As the changed tips section provides greater detail today, they continues to be unclear about what research were used. Old-fashioned classification studies statement what data has (common articles in the research matrix) and just what observations (common rows) were used. One thing will be a feature however, generally that is new other EEG streams otherwise fMRI voxels an such like. Findings are usually day factors. Here I suppose the latest authors switched the new raw examples on the a beneficial other area using dominating part studies. This isn’t mentioned in the event the dimensionality was quicker using the dissertation purchase eigenvalues. Either way, I assume the information trials (compiled on 128 Hz) have been next utilized as the observations additionally the EEG avenues turned because of the PCA were used due to the fact provides. The stimulus labels had been tasked just like the To the otherwise Out-of each shot. A collection of fifty% away from trials (and you can brands) ended up being picked randomly to possess degree, and the others was utilized to have review. Is it proper?