And to really question Interpretations of data so As minor scientific training proceeded I went from reading the entirety of journal. Articles of puzzling. Through everything to focusing on intro discussion to a much more mature position where i focus on methods and results and being very skeptical of interpretive action in in in in these papers interpretive writing which oftentimes introduction into the discussion and so and and that has come about i think because i'm much more willing to say They keep using the term used infants. Earlier it is not easy to define what inferences it's it's one of those funny terms that get thrown around that can mean a lot of different things to different people so that's a good example where that might occur in a paper for example on seizing coding in the brain visual cortex insane. We'll talk about in france. And i'll say i don't really buy the story because this is a term. It's really a filler term that it can take on different meanings for different readers and I think i'm much more willing to to call that out to in my own reading my own annotations in what. I'm reading end to end to sort of deconstruct positions And to try and dig down and say how much of what they're segment turns on this funny notion here that's not well defined an and then what the next is okay. What are they actually doing. What did they actually find. And that's where you get this focus on methods and results and then you can say okay. Here's the tangible output from the study at. Here's their interpretation but it has all these conceptual issues. And of course john and i are of the opinion that there has been a recent flowering of conceptual issues and it pays to pay attention to some of them. That is a great segue. I believe to to talk about the paper and which is a. Let's see how do i. How do i introduce this paper..