NeuroBench:A Framework for Benchmarking Neuromorphic Computing Algorithms and Systems

Neuromorphic computing shows promise for advancing computing efficiency and capabilities of AI applications using brain-inspired principles. However, the neuromorphic research field currently lacks standardized benchmarks, making it difficult to accurately measure technological advancements, compare performance with conventional methods, and identify promising future research directions. Prior neuromorphic computing benchmark efforts have not seen widespread adoption due to a lack of inclusive, actionable, and iterative benchmark design and guidelines. To address these shortcomings, we present NeuroBench: a benchmark framework for neuromorphic computing algorithms and systems. NeuroBench is a collaboratively-designed effort from an open community of nearly 100 co-authors across over 50 institutions in industry and academia, aiming to provide a representative structure for standardizing the evaluation of neuromorphic approaches. The NeuroBench framework introduces a common set of tools and systematic methodology for inclusive benchmark measurement, delivering an objective reference framework for quantifying neuromorphic approaches in both hardware-independent (algorithm track) and hardware-dependent (system track) settings. In this article, we present initial performance baselines across various model architectures on the algorithm track and outline the system track benchmark tasks and guidelines. NeuroBench is intended to continually expand its benchmarks and features to foster and track the progress made by the research community

Colorectal Cancer Stage at Diagnosis Before vs During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Italy

IMPORTANCE Delays in screening programs and the reluctance of patients to seek medical attention because of the outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 could be associated with the risk of more advanced colorectal cancers at diagnosis. OBJECTIVE To evaluate whether the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic was associated with more advanced oncologic stage and change in clinical presentation for patients with colorectal cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This retrospective, multicenter cohort study included all 17 938 adult patients who underwent surgery for colorectal cancer from March 1, 2020, to December 31, 2021 (pandemic period), and from January 1, 2018, to February 29, 2020 (prepandemic period), in 81 participating centers in Italy, including tertiary centers and community hospitals. Follow-up was 30 days from surgery. EXPOSURES Any type of surgical procedure for colorectal cancer, including explorative surgery, palliative procedures, and atypical or segmental resections. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was advanced stage of colorectal cancer at diagnosis. Secondary outcomes were distant metastasis, T4 stage, aggressive biology (defined as cancer with at least 1 of the following characteristics: signet ring cells, mucinous tumor, budding, lymphovascular invasion, perineural invasion, and lymphangitis), stenotic lesion, emergency surgery, and palliative surgery. The independent association between the pandemic period and the outcomes was assessed using multivariate random-effects logistic regression, with hospital as the cluster variable. RESULTS A total of 17 938 patients (10 007 men [55.8%]; mean [SD] age, 70.6 [12.2] years) underwent surgery for colorectal cancer: 7796 (43.5%) during the pandemic period and 10 142 (56.5%) during the prepandemic period. Logistic regression indicated that the pandemic period was significantly associated with an increased rate of advanced-stage colorectal cancer (odds ratio [OR], 1.07; 95%CI, 1.01-1.13; P = .03), aggressive biology (OR, 1.32; 95%CI, 1.15-1.53; P < .001), and stenotic lesions (OR, 1.15; 95%CI, 1.01-1.31; P = .03). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE This cohort study suggests a significant association between the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and the risk of a more advanced oncologic stage at diagnosis among patients undergoing surgery for colorectal cancer and might indicate a potential reduction of survival for these patients

Torvis Oculis. Occupational Roots of BehavioralNeurotoxicology in the Last two Centuries and Beyond

Behavioral toxicology is an important discipline of toxicology that traces its roots back to the origin of psychology. A parallel development can be traced for behavioral toxicology and psychology, in that both were focused on the mind or behavior, as distinct from neurology, that recognized the brain as the ultimate target. Ancient physicians and non-medical authors incidentally described the effects of neurotoxic agents on mood. In the last two centuries, experimental psychology, behaviorism and behavioral pharmacology further developed the observation of behavior with scientific methodology. During the Industrial Revolution exposure to neurotoxicants became widespread in the western world and the consequent “psycho-organic syndrome” was likely to affect a large part of the working population. Occupational Medicine met behavioral toxicology in the 1960s. The assessment of the effects of exposure on behavior was achieved with specific tests for motor and cognitive functions, and computer technology could be used to control and analyze behavioral experiments. The contribution of this discipline became further important in the identification of early adverse effects, also from environmental and dietary exposure. The detection of behavioral changes can precede the detection of neural changes, which makes the assessment of behavior especially suitable for risk assessment. Neurobehavioral methodology has further developed in the latest years towards a global and integrated approach to the different life stages of individuals, from early life to old age

Neuroaesthetics of Art Vision: an Experimental Approach to the Sense of Beauty

Objective NEVArt research aims to study the correlation between a set of neurophysiological/emotional reactions and the level of aesthetic appreciation of around 500 experimental subjects during the observation of 18 different paintings from the XVI-XVIII century in a real museum context. Methods Several bio-signals have been recorded to evaluate the participants’ reactions during the observation of paintings. Among them: (a) neurovegetative, motor and emotional biosignals were recorded using wearable tools for EEG (electroencephalogram), ECG (electrocardiogram) and EDA (electrodermal activity); (b) gaze pattern during the observation of art works, while (c) data of the participants (age, gender, education, familiarity with art, etc.) and their explicit judgments about paintings have been obtained. Participants were invited to respond during the observation of paintings, reporting the degree of pleasantness, perceived movement and familiarity with the painted subject. Results Each recorded bio-signal will be correlated with the explicit evaluations obtained by participants during the museum experience. These results may contribute to enlarge the theoretical framework on the physiological, cognitive and emotional responses of people when viewing pictorial artworks. Conclusion The NEVArt research, both in term of technical skills and upgrade in neuroscientific awareness, can be the basis to proceed with a set of further research topics in the near future. Ground-breaking and statistically significant observations can be derived from the present research, mainly at the biological, medical and didactical point of view by paving the way for many other multidisciplinary research developments on art exhibit, architecture, etc

Effect of RNS60 in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: a phase II multicentre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is a fatal neurodegenerative disease with limited treatment options. RNS60 is an immunomodulatory and neuroprotective investigational product that has shown efficacy in animal models of ALS and other neurodegenerative diseases. Its administration has been safe and well-tolerated in ALS subjects in previous early phase trials

Effect of centre volume on pathological outcomes and postoperative complications after surgery for colorectal cancer: results of a multicentre national study

Background: The association between volume, complications and pathological outcomes is still under debate regarding colorectal cancer surgery. The aim of the study was to assess the association between centre volume and severe complications, mortality, less-than-radical oncologic surgery, and indications for neoadjuvant therapy.Methods: Retrospective analysis of 16,883 colorectal cancer cases from 80 centres (2018-2021). Outcomes: 30-day mortality; Clavien-Dindo grade >2 complications; removal of >= 12 lymph nodes; non-radical resection; neoadjuvant therapy. Quartiles of hospital volumes were classified as LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH, and VERY HIGH. Independent predictors, both overall and for rectal cancer, were evaluated using logistic regression including age, gender, AJCC stage and cancer site.Results: LOW-volume centres reported a higher rate of severe postoperative complications (OR 1.50, 95% c.i. 1.15-1.096, P = 0.003). The rate of >= 12 lymph nodes removed in LOW-volume (OR 0.68, 95% c.i. 0.56-0.85, P = 12 lymph nodes removed was lower in LOW-volume than in VERY HIGH-volume centres (OR 0.57, 95% c.i. 0.41-0.80, P = 0.001). A lower rate of neoadjuvant chemoradiation was associated with HIGH (OR 0.66, 95% c.i. 0.56-0.77, P < 0.001), MEDIUM (OR 0.75, 95% c.i. 0.60-0.92, P = 0.006), and LOW (OR 0.70, 95% c.i. 0.52-0.94, P = 0.019) volume centres (vs. VERY HIGH).Conclusion: Colorectal cancer surgery in low-volume centres is at higher risk of suboptimal management, poor postoperative outcomes, and less-than-adequate oncologic resections. Centralisation of rectal cancer cases should be taken into consideration to optimise the outcomes