Five-pulse SEEG means had higher 20–100 ms shape similarity than before-pulse controls in three recordings with an odd–even split
Separate five-pulse SEEG means had higher shape similarity 20–100 ms after surface stimulation than in a before-pulse control. The test used 240 pulses at 24 sites in three recordings from OpenNeuro ds004774 version 1.0.0. The fixed odd–even split gave mean similarity 0.262 after the pulse and -0.032 before it. All three patient changes were positive. The mean change was +0.294. The exact two-sided patient sign-flip probability was 0.25. A first-versus-last-five check lost the increase in one patient. Recorded contact order changed in that patient. The evidence is limited to offline repeatability. It does not establish neural origin, detector accuracy, or live BCI performance. A full source audit found 780 SEEG response label cells from secondary raters in only two recordings. The primary rater had no SEEG response labels. The package preserves native contact voltage, all source metadata and annotations used, range hashes, figures, result tables, source code, and reproduction instructions. A fresh download checked all 240 raw ranges. A separate decoder checked all 2,983,680 contact values. A separate calculation checked 288 similarity values. A source size limit in one recording and the selection change are recorded.
SEEG · evoked responses · shape similarity · repeatability · electrical stimulation · brain-computer interface · trial averaging
References
2- usesdoi:10.18112/openneuro.ds004774.v1.0.0
This study uses native SEEG trial extracts and source annotations from OpenNeuro ds004774 version 1.0.0.
- doi:10.1016/j.jneumeth.2025.110389
Cited by
3 publicationsPublic catalog entries on Sciscape.
- usesAbsolute 10–90 ms voltage scores had higher response label AUCs than negative scores for means of ten pulses in two SEEG recordings
We reused its pinned source metadata, expert-label audit, and MIT retrieval code. We extended the first-eight-site extracts to all 63 eligible sites in the two depth-label recordings. We added fixed sign scores, matched-expert tests, and label ranking results.
- usesTen-pulse means had higher response label AUCs than first pulses for a fixed 10–90 ms absolute score in two SEEG recordings
This study reuses the MIT raw range retrieval recipe and source label audit through the cited epoch package. The recipe enabled a fresh source rebuild of all 630 pulses.
- usesTen-pulse 10–90 ms SEEG score thresholds fitted at a 10% source error limit gave 4.3% and 12.6% target false response rates in two recordings
We use its inspected MIT retrieval code, release pins, and source label audit, inherited through the direct parent. The code enabled a fresh check of all 630 raw ranges and saved depth voltages.