Band power did not predict later free recall in 21 RepFR1 patients
We tested whether 0–0.75 s post-word SEEG band power predicted later free recall in RepFR1. We applied the prior study’s features and decoder to 16 new patients and combined them with 5 archived patients (21 total; 5,616 word presentations). A preregistered primary endpoint, held-out AUC over all presentations after serial position was removed, had mean 0.498 (95% CI 0.483–0.513; one-sided sign-flip p = 0.58). No secondary endpoint was significant after Holm correction (p = 0.53 for each): first presentation of 1x words had mean AUC 0.537, first presentation of 3x words 0.512, and the 3x first-minus-third AUC difference was +0.022. The new and archived patients gave similar results. Serial position alone had mean AUC 0.530, higher than the SEEG decoder. A list-filter amendment was made before final analysis after smoke tests revealed artifact AUCs of 0.90 and 0.93 when lists without matched recall annotations were retained; without the filter, the 3x-first result was mean AUC 0.549 (p = 0.047), which was not accepted as evidence. The findings are limited to one session and lists 0–9 per patient, one fixed feature set and decoder, no electrode localization or region selection, and offline analysis. Data-derived feature and event caches are omitted from the public package because provenance identifies an unversioned live mirror and does not establish the exact dataset release; source URLs and hashes remain in the archived provenance, and the underlying dataset is linked in the main text.
SEEG · free recall · memory · subsequent memory · band power · shrinkage LDA · AUC · memory BCI
References
3- supportsSEEG band power did not predict later free recall above chance in five RepFR1 patients sci:sha256:88f45798b572316e24951c4d2798e2b775c5041a9dcc73259855b728c0add782
Its null result (no group-level subsequent-recall readout from 0-0.75 s band power) holds in 16 new patients: mean AUC 0.497 over all presentations, and 0.498 (95% CI 0.483-0.513) over all 21 patients. Its higher 1x-word AUC (0.598) became smaller with more patients (0.537, Holm p = 0.53).
- usesSEEG band power did not predict later free recall above chance in five RepFR1 patients sci:sha256:88f45798b572316e24951c4d2798e2b775c5041a9dcc73259855b728c0add782
We reuse its archived band-power features for 5 patients (R1501J, R1514E, R1516E, R1528E, R1534D) without change, and its feature, decoder and CV method. We changed its fetch_features.py (post-word window only, channel types saved, first available session).
- usesSEEG band power was near chance for repetition decoding after serial-position control in four patients sci:sha256:86fd8c699c922fd9236cb21b6d062ee720c07cce20b7ebde410e475b094e2572
The HTTP byte-range EDF fetch recipe for ds005411 (through the 085784a0 copy) is the base of code/fetch_features.py.
Cited by
2 publicationsPublic catalog entries on Sciscape.
- usesAcross 23 RepFR1 SEEG patients, band power weakly separated repeated from first word presentations at matched serial position, with no univariate suppression
Input: archived per-word band-power features and events.tsv files (23 patients); SHA-256 values checked against its record.
- supportsIn 21 RepFR1 patients, events.tsv sample was word-locked and onset was not
Its features were read at the sample column. We show that sample is word-locked in all its 21 patients and onset is not. Thus its null read-out did not come from misaligned epochs.
- usesIn 21 RepFR1 patients, events.tsv sample was word-locked and onset was not
We use its events.tsv files, its session provenance (SHA-256 checked), its patient set and its feature code as the reference for the time column.