Phase and future signal scores chose different SEEG pairs in 17 of 36 patients with a 50 ms phase target
We tested two rules for selection of a SEEG recording pair in 36 selected patients from OpenNeuro ds004100 version 1.1.3. One rule used centered phase loss for a nominal 50 ms target. The other used prediction error for a complex signal from future samples only. Each patient supplied four fixed bipolar pairs and two 60-second files. File A fixed all model weights and choices. File B supplied the test. The rules chose different pairs in 17 of 36 patients. On file B, mean future signal skill was 10.80% at phase-selected pairs and 11.14% at future-selected pairs. The mean gain was 0.34 percentage points, with a descriptive 95% patient bootstrap interval from -2.01 to 2.50. This test showed no clear gain and did not establish equal performance. The future target used no available input sample and had zero response to constant voltage offsets. Independent noise controls showed phase agreement from shared past samples, with no mean future signal gain. All 72 source prefixes and pinned channel records passed fresh checks. A second process reproduced 77 main result files exactly. The package preserves exact inputs, source receipts, code, fitted weights, predictions, four figures, target proofs, and replay instructions. The result applies to short, selected, reused epilepsy records. It does not test live stimulation or clinical benefit.
stereoelectroencephalography · SEEG · phase prediction · signal prediction · contact selection · ridge regression · brain interfaces
References
5- usesA zero-sum filter removed constant-baseline effects on interior theta phase targets in 36 public SEEG files sci:sha256:14f4384bd9f6a2ceff410544533d4f58ffe6f11ece71fdf90c67beca78708b48
Used its zero-sum complex filter correction and projection argument to remove constant voltage effects from the full and future targets.
- usesComplex voltage targets reduced mean 50 ms offline theta phase error across files from 36 selected SEEG patients sci:sha256:7bb26e9262cd7cf318aacf4eb9c26e67d5a3c1bf62ddd55c19ff2723bdfab146
Used its exact 72 input arrays, 36-patient cohort, fixed pairs, source receipts, retrieval code, and ridge conventions for the new contact selection test.
- usesA 500 ms past voltage sum gave a 63.26 degree error for centered theta phase 50 ms ahead in seven SEEG rest records sci:sha256:678ac0e1b4e8d00b5e72eb22a8e9bbbfc9c4bd67c224a77925cb4cba677fc26f
Used its centered-filter support argument and independent-noise result to define the contact selection question and known-past control.
- usesAn early linear model gave 5.20 degrees less error than a calibrated oscillator for a future filter angle at a 50 ms delay in seven SEEG rest records sci:sha256:608e33a7873c37cc9cabe12c4c8cc76a742c43807965cfcbadd1e291bda18cfe
Used its future filter target distinction to separate future recorded signal prediction from the centered phase reference.
- usesdoi:10.18112/openneuro.ds004100.v1.1.3
The study used selected SEEG contacts and source records from the HUP iEEG Epilepsy Dataset, ds004100 version 1.1.3.
Cited by
1 publicationPublic catalog entries on Sciscape.
- usesA learned state with the last voltage sample reduced mean 7 Hz filter phase error against held voltage after 20 ms simulated gaps in 36 SEEG patients with exact pre-gap states
We reused all 72 exact native digital input arrays, the 36-patient and four-pair selection, and inherited source records. The new study made no exclusions. We also adapted its metadata check and carried its retrieval and audit scripts into the new package.