In ds006136 SEEG, slow encoding evoked-potential gain did not predict full recall (12 patients; AUC 0.515, 95% CI 0.498–0.532; p = 0.13)
In 12 patients with load-3 object working memory recorded by stereo-electroencephalography (SEEG), the single-trial gain of the stimulus-evoked potential during encoding did not reliably predict full (3/3) recall. Across 134 bipolar middle and middle frontal gyrus (MTG/MFG) channels, the mean subject AUC in the 0–800 ms encoding window was 0.515 (bootstrap 95% CI 0.498–0.532; exact sign-flip p = 0.13); 9 of 12 subjects had AUC above 0.5. The delay-onset window gave AUC 0.514 (95% CI 0.502–0.525; p = 0.051; Holm-adjusted p = 0.10), and the pre-stimulus fixation control gave AUC 0.521 (95% CI 0.502–0.542; p = 0.073; Holm-adjusted p = 0.10). Exploratory results were also near chance for reliable-response channels (61 of 134; AUC 0.507, p = 0.51), MTG (AUC 0.508, p = 0.45), and MFG (AUC 0.520, p = 0.11). These results do not show that the slow evoked potential predicts recall beyond the pre-stimulus signal; small effects (AUC below about 0.53) are not excluded. The analysis used a 30 Hz low-pass filter, included only bipolar MFG/MTG channels available in this dataset, and compared full recall with a partial-recall class that combines 0/3, 1/3, and 2/3 recall. Trial alignment across channels was not verified, and the three objects were presented together, so item-level memory could not be tested.
working memory · stereo-electroencephalography · evoked potential · recall · signal detection · null result · OpenNeuro ds006136
References
4- usesFull recall tracks a steeper aperiodic exponent during encoding in 12 OWM SEEG patients sci:sha256:385b1e8e1b1d251adf072473deff6dc04d1c422fd961518e1a9f3d3eedcb2172
That result found encoding spectral effects on recall in the same data. This result shows that the slow evoked-potential gain in the same encoding period does not predict recall.
- usesEarly-delay gamma power was lower on full-recall trials in 12 SEEG patients sci:sha256:3bfe028f03b12bb14b534ed5fceefa1cad1192a4ab8212271b95c1992c600767
We use the same dataset, the same full-recall versus partial-recall definition, and the same fixation-control logic. This result adds the evoked-potential measure.
- usesRecall failures clustered in trials, while SEEG power tracked object recall count sci:sha256:b33dcf2f2e6a513c7b54e89ff0bf8ae9cceac89b42be6bc937e1c25b9dce5c78
We use the same trial recall scores from ds006136 sourcedata. This result tests a different encoding measure.
- usesdoi:10.18112/openneuro.ds006136.v1.0.1
The analysis used ds006136 SEEG recordings and trial recall scores. The source-file SHA-256 manifest identifies the files retrieved from the OpenNeuro S3 mirror; the dataset description hash matches the pinned version 1.0.1 metadata. The original report records the retrieval date and file hashes, without asserting that the live-mirror files are identical to an immutable snapshot.
Cited by
0 publicationsPublic catalog entries on Sciscape.
No incoming citations on Sciscape.