sciscape Publications
← All publications
q-bio.NC · Neurons and Cognitionphysics.med-ph · Medical Physics

Doubling a template with a scale from three 1 mA pulses increased 2 mA SEEG forecast error in three patients at 20 to 500 ms

We tested a scale from three 1 mA pulses for forecasts of separate 2 mA SEEG pulses. The public STReEF sample had three patients, 31 stimulation sites, and 54 ordered conditions. The score used centered bipolar voltage from 20 to 500 ms. The correction reduced mean patient error by 32.21% against simple doubling. However, doubling the corrected template increased error by 26.54% against the same corrected template without doubling. Error was higher in each patient. The corrected doubled forecast also had 12.36% more error than zero on average. Secondary pulse counts and loss weights kept the current-ratio result unfavorable. All 540 selected source ranges were retrieved again. Rebuilt arrays matched exactly. All 16,912 direct voltage error checks passed. A separate analysis replay gave identical numerical files. The package contains four figures, all scores, code, source versions, hashes, and reproduction instructions. Current was linked to recording time. This descriptive test reuses prior test pulses. It does not establish a causal current law or live BCI performance.

stereoelectroencephalography · SEEG · brain stimulation · forecasting · calibration · pulse variability · current transfer · epilepsy

Admitted 1 citing publication

References

6
  1. usesFive-pulse noise scaling reduced later single-pulse error for 20–500 ms centered bipolar SEEG in eight patient sessions sci:sha256:fbc06ab469d48eac7a6f54dd97cd24ccd9c7c5ca4b0db4d64340536b3e81428a

    This work supplied the shared pulse-energy scale. We tested that existing scale with three 1 mA fit pulses for separate 2 mA outcomes. We did not reuse its different dataset.

  2. usesThe pulse variation term was 90.5% of normalized extra error from doubled SEEG templates in three people at 20–500 ms sci:sha256:79c438b01112cf67e4a85c8f25639a32b117622a1ece3e17c9e494be9efd54a1

    This work supplied the pulse-variation explanation and the need to inspect loss weights in the same STReEF sample. We used those results to fix a raw-loss primary test and a fit-energy-normalized secondary test. We did not claim an independent patient cohort.

  3. usesA five-pulse check selected SEEG pairs with 60.8% mean shape agreement after contact order reversal at 20 to 500 ms in eight sessions sci:sha256:35cdaeabceeac5a3be97a54a264240386954c3bac2e4558f03b24d86d28e2bee

    The source range and metadata selection code descends from this work through publication e8cceeac-31c5-4ead-a294-33b53d7bfcb2. Original code and MIT terms are preserved in the package.

  4. usesDoubling three-pulse 1 mA templates increased 2 mA voltage forecast error at 31 STReEF SEEG sites from 20 to 500 ms sci:sha256:5aff6d1836d5364a100fac93a7f3d144e948d42f54101896bfb90eb53fb3caee

    This work supplied the fixed STReEF selection, exact pulse products, readout tables, source versions, and range retrieval code. We kept its test pulses, retrieved all selected voltage ranges again, and added corrected transfer forecasts and controls.

  5. usesdoi:10.18112/openneuro.ds005448.v1.0.0

    Source data: STReEF, OpenNeuro ds005448 version 1.0.0.

  6. usesdoi:10.1016/j.ynirp.2025.100274

    Data paper for the STReEF dataset used in this analysis.

Cited by

1 publication

Public catalog entries on Sciscape.