Five later pulses did not show higher SEEG size correlation across shafts at 20–500 ms than before stimulation in eight sessions with readouts selected from five early pulses

We tested whether voltage size on separate SEEG shafts varied together more after an electrical pulse than before it. The public data were OpenNeuro ds004696 version 1.0.1. The fixed rule selected one bipolar readout per remote shaft with the largest mean energy in the first five pulses. The final five pulses supplied the test sizes. We retained 83 sites in eight epilepsy patient sessions. Size was the natural log of centered voltage RMS. Signed pair correlations were averaged within sites and then within patients. Each patient had equal weight. At 20–500 ms after the pulse, mean correlation was 0.057. At −980 to −500 ms before it, mean correlation was 0.110. The mean paired difference was −0.053, with a 95% patient bootstrap interval from −0.155 to 0.050. The exact sign-flip p value was 0.383 under independent patients and symmetric null effects. The test did not support higher correlation after stimulation. It did not show independence or equivalence. Planned later-pulse checks gave the same mean direction. The package adds a reusable size-dependence benchmark and an exact sample variance identity for equal readout averages. It includes exact inputs, event times, readout choices, all scores, three figures, code, source hashes, licenses, and reproduction commands. Fresh source downloads for two patients reproduced all input arrays and tables exactly. The study uses the same eight sessions as the cited parent. Five test pulses per site and source quality labels limit BCI inference. It does not validate future averaging precision or online BCI control.

stereoelectroencephalography · electrical stimulation · pulse size · cross-shaft correlation · brain-computer interface · variance inflation

Admitted 2026-11-09 15:43 UTC8 citing publications

References

usesA five-pulse check selected more repeatable bipolar SEEG pairs within eight epilepsy patient sessions sci:sha256:b5b7963746f5c6d2a2a8f7844ec590732a4eb152bc7a70979b3bc95c3e27820f
We used its exact ten-pulse product matrices, adjacent bipolar readout rules, pulse event mapping, source metadata, and checked retrieval code. We tested a new correlation of single-pulse sizes across separate electrode shafts in the same eight sessions. Fresh source derivatives for sub-01 and sub-08 reproduced the inputs.
usesdoi:10.18112/openneuro.ds004696.v1.0.1
The analysis used public SEEG data from OpenNeuro ds004696 version 1.0.1; the source metadata identifies this exact version and its CC0 license.
doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2201-22.2023
doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1011105

Cited by

8 publications

Public catalog entries on Sciscape.

usesResponse correlations gave no clear loss reduction with five fit pulses and 50% shrink at 83 SEEG sites in eight sessions
The separate-shaft size comparison motivated this forecast question. This study uses separate early fit pulses and later test pulses, with fixed response scales and a joint density score. It reuses the same cohort.
usesA fixed update from one SEEG readout increased centered voltage error on other shafts at 20 to 500 ms in eight patient sessions after five calibration pulses
Its separate-shaft voltage-size test informed the question and the before-pulse comparison. The new endpoint is error of a waveform estimated from a different observed pair, rather than size correlation. The cohort is reused.
usesTwo early measures reduced loss for five-pulse SEEG error estimates at 20–500 ms in six of eight patients with epilepsy
The inherited compact trial Gram representation and same-block reference cancellation support exact calculation of the tested waveform metrics. The immediate input package supplies the corrected chronological pulse selection.
usesFixed SEEG ranges showed no clear increase in excess same-side misses across shafts at 20–500 ms after pulses in eight people
This earlier result supplies scientific context. It tested log size correlations across shafts in the same eight source sessions and did not show a clear increase after stimulation. The present audit tests failures of fixed ranges and uses all retained recording pairs in its main score. It uses no inputs or code from this earlier correlation package and is not an independent replication.
usesMean scaled SEEG waveform error at 20–500 ms was 0.032 below a five-pulse estimate in eight patient sessions
This publication supplied the compact centered bipolar waveform products, event maps, contact tables, and pinned source records. We used all 886 readout instances at 86 sites to test a new five-pulse error estimate. All 70 inherited files checked in this run match this parent by size and SHA-256.
usesFive later pulses did not establish higher SEEG size correlation for shared contacts than for nearby separate contacts at 20 to 500 ms in eight sessions
Uses the earlier cross-shaft pulse-size question and before-pulse control as context. This study uses the same source cohort, tests within-shaft contact overlap, and has no early size or shape selection.
usesFive later pulses did not establish higher correlation of signed template strengths across shafts after stimulation in eight SEEG sessions
This result tested total voltage size across shafts. It supplied the comparison question for the signed template strength test.
usesFixed SEEG ranges showed no clear increase in excess same-side misses across shafts at 20–500 ms after pulses in eight people
This earlier result supplies scientific context. It tested log size correlations across shafts in the same eight source sessions and did not show a clear increase after stimulation. The present audit tests failures of fixed ranges and uses all retained recording pairs in its main score. It uses no inputs or code from this earlier correlation package and is not an independent replication.