Last Updated on May 17, 2023 by pg@petergamma.org
- If we look at the paper of NeuroKit2:
https://link.springer.com/article/10.3758/s13428-020-01516-y
- And if we look at the wonderful graphs of NeuroKit2 on it’s GITHUB page:
https://github.com/neuropsychology/NeuroKit
- We think the sensors we introduced in our journal would fit perfectly to NeuroKit2 to make NeuroKit3 out of it:
- NeuroKit2 is a great piece of work.
- We had also a lot of work to put together the sensor we presented in our journal.
- We did not publish this in a scientific paper.
- But the step from our journal to a scientific paper is not too far.
- Without NeuroKit3, we will start coding ourselves our own Python software with some of the sensors we introduced.
- But do not have any plans to publish a paper about software or sell any software
- We are physiologists, and not software developers.
- It will take a lot of time to develop our own software, which we currently don’t have.
- We will do this only if we do not have another option.
- We will loose a lot of data from the meditators of the MRIS without a suitable software for sensor data aquisition.
- Most of the sensors we have are difficult to process and analyse.
- How can a software define itself as a “Python Toolbox for Neurophysiological Signal Processing” without EEG sensors?
- Integrating the sensors presented in our journal would change this.
- Is this not an easy job for a coder at the university level?
- We would be very happy to use NeuroKit3 and write issues about it.
- With NeuroKit 2, we miss EEG sensors, as well as InfluxDB.
- Without NeuroKit 3, the Meditation Research Institute Switzerland (MRIS) continues to suffer from a suitable Python Toolbox for Neurophysiological Signal Processing.
- And the MRIS will continue not to be found on Google Scholar:
- but only on Google picture search:
But we are confident about the future of the MRIS, since it is a meditation research project with a long-term goal who wants to be successful on the long term.