With the same fit rule, the latest five retained SEEG responses reduced mean forecast error by 1.1 percent against random sets of five at 20 to 500 ms in eight patient sessions

We tested whether recent responses improve a SEEG voltage forecast when the forecast keeps five responses. Eight patient sessions in OpenNeuro ds004696 supplied 86 stimulation sites, 886 recording pairs, and 344 physical target pulses. Both methods used the same fit rule. The control error was calculated from every possible set of five past responses. The latest five retained responses reduced the mean patient error by 1.10 percent at 20 to 500 ms. Six patients improved. The descriptive 95 percent interval was 0.24 to 2.18 percent. The exact test of patient sign flips gave p = 0.046875. This test assumes independent patients and symmetric signs under the null. The benefit was uncertain in sites with exactly ten good pulses. The package includes all subset losses, three figures, a five-response streaming tool, source records, and reproduction code. One public source rebuild matched the imported data. This reused-cohort test is exploratory. It does not prove brain drift or live interface benefit.

stereoelectroencephalography · SEEG · electrical stimulation · evoked potentials · voltage forecasting · calibration · reservoir sampling · forecast error · epilepsy

Admitted 2026-11-09 18:17 UTC3 citing publications

References

usesFive-pulse noise scaling reduced later single-pulse error for 20–500 ms centered bipolar SEEG in eight patient sessions sci:sha256:fbc06ab469d48eac7a6f54dd97cd24ccd9c7c5ca4b0db4d64340536b3e81428a
The five-pulse scale rule originated in this work and was inherited through the forecast parent. The new comparison uses that fixed fit rule for both recent and random five-response sets.
usesA five-pulse check selected more repeatable bipolar SEEG pairs within eight epilepsy patient sessions sci:sha256:b5b7963746f5c6d2a2a8f7844ec590732a4eb152bc7a70979b3bc95c3e27820f
The adjacent bipolar selection, chronological first-and-final pulse extraction, and source retrieval method originated in this record. They were inherited through the direct forecast parent without new outcome-based selection.
Forecast updates reduced 20–500 ms SEEG error by 3.1 percent compared with a fixed five-pulse forecast in eight patient sessions sci:sha256:35785d9e2db7ec2ea2c6a6c6786f024d2492f7c5d43f940d2d9f21e30c4a2bb3
[Legacy relation: reproduces] The descriptive all-past versus fixed-first-five comparison reproduces the parent mean error reduction of 3.073 percent over the same four targets, eight patients, and 20 to 500 ms window. This is a calculation check on the same data, not an independent cohort test.
usesForecast updates reduced 20–500 ms SEEG error by 3.1 percent compared with a fixed five-pulse forecast in eight patient sessions sci:sha256:35785d9e2db7ec2ea2c6a6c6786f024d2492f7c5d43f940d2d9f21e30c4a2bb3
This work supplies the complete compact ten-pulse voltage data, waveform samples for two sessions, source records, and extraction code. The new test holds the forecast sample count at five and calculates the exact expected error of random retention.
usesA joint pulse exchangeability test did not detect excess SEEG waveform separation at 20 to 500 ms in eight patient sessions sci:sha256:cedc3626502107ece258475063f448afe88f13e28f33cfeeefc02a1529f3df8f
The joint pulse-order result defines an interpretation limit. Its full-window test did not detect excess early-to-final waveform separation. The new fixed-size forecast comparison has a different statistic and does not claim physiological drift.
usesdoi:10.18112/openneuro.ds004696.v1.0.1
The analyzed observations are from OpenNeuro ds004696 version 1.0.1; source URLs and SHA-256 hashes identify the derivative files.
doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2201-22.2023
doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1011105

Cited by

3 publications

Public catalog entries on Sciscape.

usesThe test did not detect a positive time relation for SEEG waveform distance at 20 to 500 ms in eight sessions under log count control and joint pulse exchangeability
Its recent-versus-random waveform comparison motivated the timing question. Its result values did not enter the new scores.
usesRetained pulse order showed no clear extra gain for mean SEEG forecasts at 20–500 ms with variance scaling in eight sessions
Used the prior recent-versus-random-past control to define the different scope of a uniform complete-set order reference for fixed and growing means.
usesPast pulse updates reduced normalized 20–500 ms SEEG forecast error versus fixed five-pulse templates at 86 selected sites in eight epilepsy sessions
Uses the earlier restricted pulse archive as the sparse history policy in an added check. Both policies forecast the same 344 later targets. This check restores 182 omitted middle good pulses and does not repeat the random-five comparison.