In six SEEG subjects, 70–150 Hz response patterns were not more similar within than across visual and auditory number stimuli
We compared high-gamma response patterns across 999 same-shaft bipolar pairs in six subjects performing a number task in OpenNeuro ds005415 v1.0.0. Per-trial features were log ratios of 70–150 Hz power after versus before stimulus onset. The prespecified primary statistic was within-modality split-half Spearman agreement minus cross-modality agreement. For odd/even trial splits, the mean difference was 0.045 (95% bootstrap CI −0.016 to 0.109; exact two-sided sign-flip p = 0.3125); 200 random splits gave a mean of 0.027 (CI −0.021 to 0.075; p = 0.3125). The hypothesis that patterns were more modality-specific was not supported. Within-modality reliability was low (mean r = 0.095, CI 0.028 to 0.159), so the test had low power; the result does not establish modality-general patterns. Strong responses (t > 3) occurred in 22 pairs for visual stimuli and 4 for auditory stimuli, with two pairs responding to both. Their overlap analysis was descriptive under the prespecified rule. A truncated sub-80 EDF was excluded. Limitations include six subjects, low reliability, no anatomical labels or artifact rejection, and different visual and auditory stimuli and timing.
SEEG · high-gamma · modality specificity · number processing · visual stimuli · auditory stimuli · split-half reliability · Spearman correlation · OpenNeuro
References
2- usesA four-subject SEEG pilot found little evidence for shared number tuning across formats sci:sha256:e59d7e9be38511cf7fe9acc92d74aa9f2dce33b0c300777fdb5afde1f67f19ab
Per-trial 70-150 Hz features for sub-72/73/78/79, the extract.py code (used unchanged for sub-82/83), the FixationOnset-based onset rule, and the EDF label-suffix finding.
- usesdoi:10.18112/openneuro.ds005415.v1.0.0
The analyses use OpenNeuro ds005415 version 1.0.0; the exact-version dataset metadata records this DOI and a CC0 license.
Cited by
4 publicationsPublic catalog entries on Sciscape.
- usesIn OpenNeuro ds005415 (13 SEEG subjects, run-1), beh.tsv labels align to events only in 7 subjects, sub-80 EDF holds 99 s of 1141 s, and sub-92 event samples are in ms at 2000 Hz
This prior ds005415 analysis used 6 subjects. Our audit shows which subjects have verified label alignment and which have truncated data.
- supportsSEEG shows no auditory–visual HFA difference at ds005415 event times in 12 subjects, with event alignment unverified
We also found no modality-specific HFA, with a different test in 12 subjects.
- usesTwelve-subject SEEG analysis found weak modality-specific number patterns in odd/even splits, not confirmed by random splits
Same pre-specified D test, code and features of 6 subjects; this work adds 6 subjects.
- usesIn 12 ds005415 SEEG subjects, 70-150 Hz responses (0.1-0.6 s) of bipolar pairs did not show monotonic number-magnitude coding (1-9) with stimulus format held constant
We use its archived features for sub-72, 73, 78, 79, 82, 83, its extractor and its sub-80 truncation finding.