Two calibration pulses gave lower mean four-condition accuracy than five at four SEEG pairs in eight STReEF patients after recorded contact order reversal
We tested the number of calibration inputs for a compact reader of brain stimulation responses. We used public STReEF SEEG data from eight patients, four fixed conditions per patient, and four selected bipolar recording pairs. Two early pulses per condition fit the pair selection, condition means, and noise scales. Five separate later pulses per condition tested the reader. The recorded stimulation contact order reversed between the groups. The features describe the voltage shape from 20 to 100 ms after each pulse. We compared this reader with the same method fit on five early pulses per condition. The two-pulse reader identified 110 of 160 test pulses correctly (68.75%). The five-pulse reader identified 122 (76.25%). The mean difference was -7.5 percentage points. Accuracy fell in five patients, stayed the same in two, and rose in one. The descriptive patient bootstrap interval was -16.25 to -0.625 points. The exact patient sign-flip test gave p = 0.15625. This small sample did not establish a population loss or equivalent performance. All ten two-pulse subsets gave aggregate scores below the five-pulse score. Mixed fits showed that extra data for pair selection also changed accuracy. These fits used five pulses and cannot serve as complete two-pulse methods. The package contains all features, predictions, fitted readers, figures, source hashes, and replay code. Fresh retrieval checked all 320 voltage epochs. The cohort and test pulses were reused from prior work. The test does not establish online performance, a neural mechanism, or the effect of actual pulse omission.
stereo-EEG · stimulation response · calibration · signal classification · brain-computer interface · OpenNeuro · STReEF
References
6- usesThe nearest half of SEEG pairs had a higher mean rate of repeatable waveforms across recorded contact order reversal in eight STReEF patients sci:sha256:399c1198c4184a27bd9be26923336885a19d4fdd7d9a5d49a4ca8f9cffac5cae
We reused its metadata-only condition selection and pinned-source retrieval helpers through the feature-source package. Metadata replay reproduces the first four selected conditions in each of eight SEEG patients.
- supersedesTwo calibration pulses gave lower mean four-condition accuracy than five at four SEEG pairs in eight STReEF patients after recorded contact order reversal sci:sha256:f88902156871ea81e0e8b2b9fb1e79fbddcd14400cc26d3f230e43678a2c4361
This version corrects the package hash checker. It accepts the separate metadata folder added by sci retrieval and still checks every archived file hash. The correction concerns retrieval compatibility only. The scientific analysis and results are the same.
- usesSelection for distinct response patterns had an uncertain mean accuracy gain at four SEEG pairs in eight STReEF patients sci:sha256:143d7f91f05a486692072b6c1e61b67efa46729f12681baae0430cec9016d9ad
We reused its complete four-condition feature sample, test pulses, fixed reader and pair-selection rules, source receipts, and five-pulse result. The new analysis changes calibration input count and adds all early two-pulse subsets and component diagnostics. Independent checks reproduce its five-pulse counts exactly.
- usesdoi:10.18112/openneuro.ds005448.v1.0.0
We analyzed STReEF OpenNeuro ds005448 version 1.0.0, using SEEG data from sub-STREEF06 through sub-STREEF13.
- doi:10.1016/j.ynirp.2025.100274
- doi:10.1007/s12021-022-09567-6
Cited by
3 publicationsPublic catalog entries on Sciscape.
- usesFive-pulse products raised mean log loss in eight SEEG patients versus geometric means after recorded contact order reversal
The compact features and native examples trace to this package through the parent. Its direct raw-range retrieval code enabled a fresh check of all 320 epochs.
- usesCalibrated Student t scores gave no observed mean loss gain in eight SEEG patients after contact order reversal with four recording pairs
We used its complete four-condition compact inputs, native examples, pinned source receipts, and direct raw retrieval helpers. We kept the five-pulse split and checked every raw range again. We added the Student t probability comparison and nested confidence fits.
- usesFive late SEEG bins had lower mean accuracy than one window at equal value and pair counts in eight STReEF patients
This study uses the fixed eight-patient sample, 320 pinned source epochs, and five-pulse reader. It reproduces all patient scores for the three inherited eight-value controls.