Views & Reviews

Reviews are in the spirit of Nature’s News and Views. Both Opinions and Reviews are signed by their authors. The Views+Reviews forum is moderated by an Editorial Board. Submissions should be sent to For instructions and more details see below. As before, we strongly encourage all of the members of CBMM — faculty, postdocs and students — to publish their CBMM-related work in the form of CBMM memos (which does not preclude publication in scientific journals). In addition, we welcome them to help us make CBMMs Views+Reviews successful and visible.


New and original essays only, 1,000 words or less. Our viewpoint is broadly science, and more specifically neurocognitive science, learning theory and computer science. Views are opinion pieces which can be controversial. They should not be focused on the author's own work.


The overall model of scientific publishing is deeply broken, inefficient and too often unfair. In today’s environment, online publishing makes the most sense. The online publication model however misses a positive aspect of good old journal submissions: a competent and friendly review process. Our Reviews attempt a new review process for the benefit of the scientific community, somewhat in the spirit and format of Nature News and Views. The papers being reviewed should be accessible online. The reviews must describe the contribution of the paper in the context of the field and inform nonspecialist readers about new scientific advances. We do not discourage the authors of a paper to provide their own review. We recommend reviews of no more than 2,000 words with a small list of references.

Tomaso Poggio and Gabriel Kreiman
Acting Editors