sciscape Publications
← All publications
eess.SP · Signal Processing

Cycle checks missed simulated contact errors that changed SEEG site decisions in five offline sessions

We tested whether redundant voltage differences can certify a fixed brain response reader. We derived the smallest RMS error at one recorded contact that reaches a site decision boundary. Public SEEG data from OpenNeuro ds004457 version 1.0.2 supplied five patient sessions and 732 test pulses. In the 20 to 100 ms window, a targeted simulated error changed every test decision. All 287 initially correct decisions became incorrect. Every contact error passed the cycle check. Patient median boundary radii ranged from 0.45 to 1.09 microvolts RMS over all pulses, and from 1.78 to 4.92 microvolts RMS over initially correct pulses. The check detected all 4,216 control errors added to single pair outputs after subtraction. An independent calculation matched all 2,196 radii across three time windows. The algebraic detector limit was known; the new contribution is an exact contact decision radius and public failure examples. The package preserves a proof, three figures, input bins, source hashes, fitted readers, error waveforms, code, and reproduction checks. The result applies to this fixed offline reader and targeted numerical errors. The reused calibration and test blocks interleave. No real device fault rate or live interface performance was measured.

signal processing · stereoelectroencephalography · brain-computer interfaces · fault detection · decision robustness · contact errors · cycle consistency

Admitted 1 citing publication

References

7
  1. usesA contact covariance rule kept SEEG site decisions equal across equivalent bipolar trees in five offline patient tests sci:sha256:266e261520b7a5373485335ce240348d8e68e0cd91f18b9f5c7da05f29889c76

    The contact incidence matrix and equivalent-layout proof informed the contact fault map. We extend the study to exact decision radii with a fixed original-pair reader.

  2. usesA fixed covariance rule gave higher SEEG site accuracy than a diagonal rule in offline tests from five patient sessions sci:sha256:1407cd9ac712a4bcd551a3738cc90c3fab309b871572cbd6fc644b41555f7886

    We used the exact archived contact bins, source event tables, metadata, extraction code, fixed covariance reader, and pulse rules. The primary reader accuracy was reproduced. The new endpoint is the minimum one-contact decision error.

  3. usesPulse time alone gave 74.8% mean site accuracy in five offline SEEG tests with shared calibration and test blocks sci:sha256:07f3c9173d8e02cafb724475eb4d7d43bb6e6bf6e042867f73744b4ea8895b75

    Its schedule audit shows that these reused fit and test blocks interleave and that time can identify sites. We use that result to limit the interpretation of absolute reader accuracy and avoid a prospective decoding claim.

  4. usesA contact mixture raised mean 20 to 100 ms site accuracy under hidden simulated contact errors at ten times the fitted voltage scale in five SEEG sessions sci:sha256:1fe087ca2edf92bb930844bed18a6b825f82b783043f5bfea4f0cbc51ef01231

    Its shared-contact simulated-error study defines the relevant signal-chain fault model. Our study keeps the ordinary reader fixed and measures targeted minimum error size instead of fitting or comparing mixture readers.

  5. supportsA contact covariance rule kept beta distances equal across redundant pair layouts in 35 SEEG records with consistent contact differences sci:sha256:12610080f0a52b085aa0f0a96d3ef097c0ad3cbc25a687f0e866822752c16b04

    That report stated that cycle checks are incomplete. We give exact contact-boundary errors and public SEEG examples with changed decisions and zero cycle residual. This is a quantified extension of its stated limit, not a contradiction.

  6. usesdoi:10.18112/openneuro.ds004457.v1.0.2

    Source SEEG data for five patient sessions and 732 test pulses.

  7. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1325-22.2023

Cited by

1 publication

Public catalog entries on Sciscape.