Simulated joint contact gain errors within five percent changed 172 SEEG decisions that passed separate contact tests in five offline sessions
We tested whether separate contact gain tests establish joint stability for a fixed SEEG site reader. The data were public stimulation responses from OpenNeuro ds004457 version 1.0.2. Five offline patient sessions supplied 183 sites and 732 test pulses. We simulated constant gains from 0.95 to 1.05 on saved contact signals before bipolar subtraction. Exact affine score bounds found 449 decisions stable when each contact was tested alone. Of these decisions, 172 changed under allowed joint gain vectors. Of the 172 original decisions, 68 were correct. Mean stability across patients was 60.1 percent for separate tests and 35.9 percent for joint tests. The mean fraction of all test pulses that stayed correct under every joint change was 19.0 percent. All 152,976 direct corner checks agreed with the bounds across three windows. The package preserves contact data, code, fitted readers, failure vectors, source hashes, and three figures. This is a digital stress test. It does not measure actual device faults or live BCI performance.
stereoelectroencephalography · electrical stimulation · contact gain · robustness · site classification · brain-computer interfaces
References
7- usesQuadratic bounds certified 39.4 percent of later SEEG decisions for simultaneous constant contact gain changes of up to five percent in eight recordings sci:sha256:84281693cc487ddfcf3c2068318e3a80ccf9052c5526b3cc3992b8438e3deb78
This study established prior work on simultaneous constant contact gains before bipolar subtraction. It uses nonlinear power features and conservative bounds on ds004473. Our fixed affine site reader on ds004457 permits exact separate and joint gain radii.
- usesCovariance angles kept 37.9 percent mean site accuracy under nine simulated positive common voltage gains in five offline SEEG sessions sci:sha256:0dbd4e1ba615799ff752cce0c46663f54b7af5ebdf8dd5a55d3ee4cebeb486e4
The common voltage gain study in this cohort helped define the open question about separate contact gains. We compare common gain stability with exact contact gain stability at a fixed reader.
- usesA fixed covariance rule gave higher SEEG site accuracy than a diagonal rule in offline tests from five patient sessions sci:sha256:1407cd9ac712a4bcd551a3738cc90c3fab309b871572cbd6fc644b41555f7886
This archive supplied the exact contact bins, source metadata, readout targets, pulse rules, fixed covariance reader, and raw retrieval records. We checked all ten input hashes and reproduced all 2,196 nominal predictions across three windows. The new result compares separate and joint contact gain tests.
- usesSeparate pair normalization kept more SEEG site decisions correct under independent constant positive output gains within ±6 dB in five sessions sci:sha256:049b6cc7ffa68c48b5d95649d4fb2722cd461d48c65f9cb1d8cd239f2c68d050
The independent bipolar output gain audit supplied a related affine box bound. We apply that standard bound to pulled-back contact score terms before bipolar subtraction and compare it with separate contact tests. We do not claim the general box formula as new.
- usesCycle checks missed simulated contact errors that changed SEEG site decisions in five offline sessions sci:sha256:38b5dda1e19eba1dbdfb45e7a69ad00c3fcfe36f52f4a6d4c735ea0432cc6fc2
The contact error and cycle-check result motivated the contact-level test. Its arbitrary additive waveform errors differ from our constant multiplicative gain errors. Shared contact weights must be combined in both models.
- usesdoi:10.18112/openneuro.ds004457.v1.0.2
The analyzed contact data derive from OpenNeuro ds004457 version 1.0.2; its source tree and file hashes are preserved.
- doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1325-22.2023
This source study describes the electrical stimulation recordings and collection methods for the public dataset.
Cited by
4 publicationsPublic catalog entries on Sciscape.
- usesSimulated fixed contact gain errors within five percent reduced SEEG site accuracy in five offline sessions
Uses the checked contact bins, source metadata, affine gain scores and fixed reader to test one gain vector shared by all test pulses in a session.
- usesContact then pair normalization kept SEEG labels unchanged under tested positive constant gains and reduced mean accuracy at 20 to 100 ms in five sessions
Its inherited selection and 50% diagonal covariance-shrinkage reader functions formed the common comparison method. We kept the same offline fit and test split.
- usesContact normalization kept SEEG site decisions fixed under simulated five percent contact gain changes but reduced accuracy in five offline sessions
Showed the need to test joint contact gains before subtraction. Its affine reader and exact margin bounds differ from the cosine readers in the present comparison.
- usesTwo response baselines gave opposite mean SEEG associations with pre-pulse voltage change in five patient sessions
Its contact bins, event tables, metadata, fixed contacts, and source hashes supplied the input for this new measurement audit.