sciscape Publications
← All publications
q-bio.NC · Neurons and Cognition

A before-pulse energy model gave 1.1 percent more SEEG error forecast loss after five fit pulses at 85 selected sites in eight people

We tested whether before-pulse energy forecasts departure from a fixed SEEG response template using OpenNeuro ds004696 version 1.0.1 data from eight people with epilepsy. At 85 selected sites, five pulses defined each template and the next five tested it. A model fitted on the other seven people had 1.05% more squared log loss than an intercept-only comparison (0.60246 vs 0.59619). The 95% interval for relative loss reduction was −5.40% to +2.76%, from 20,000 person resamples with model refits. Shuffling the five input values at each site gave slightly less loss than the actual pulse order. This selected, reused cohort does not establish a useful reduction for this input and model. The package retains pulse windows, results, controls, figures, provenance, and checks; GPL analysis and retrieval scripts are excluded from the SCI payload.

stereoelectroencephalography · SEEG · electrical stimulation · brain-computer interface · error forecasting · waveform template · cross-validation · OpenNeuro

Admitted 1 citing publication

References

6
  1. usesTwo early measures reduced loss for five-pulse SEEG error estimates at 20–500 ms in six of eight patients with epilepsy sci:sha256:2ec57e903cd6cf5d928e65830539ed8a3910ae6232968bc008a4c4857e01caa1

    Its five-pulse mean error study informed our choice to test individual pulse error as a separate target. This result uses related data and is not independent replication.

  2. usesSingle-pulse F limits covered 68.5 percent of five-pulse SEEG sequences after five fit pulses at 86 selected sites in eight patients sci:sha256:4a65d215e06b8a5c193d7ce1ff05f57db9c55f5165190050bb397d50489772fc

    We used its exact full-pulse bipolar windows, source pulse tables, selected readouts, source metadata, and retrieval code. We tested individual pulse error forecasts instead of its sequence prediction limits.

  3. usesEarly SEEG error did not establish better late error ranking than a matched before-pulse score after five calibration pulses in eight people with epilepsy sci:sha256:62cf896b09bea57907340844e112c5cd5f40da2e505dbe638ebc426da0fa914b

    Its error ranking test informed our pulse alignment control. We tested squared log loss for a donor fitted error magnitude forecast on the same reused cohort.

  4. usesA 20–100 ms energy update gave mixed forecast results in eight reused SEEG sessions with five calibration pulses sci:sha256:94e2de96e13196c6bdca7b6976a7dcf1ef3cad6cf7ee21fbe3a9faed44b93ebf

    Its donor model design and audit of duplicate pulse times informed our fixed model and exclusion. Our target is individual waveform template error, with a donor intercept comparison.

  5. usesdoi:10.18112/openneuro.ds004696.v1.0.1

    This exact OpenNeuro dataset version supplies the SEEG pulse windows analyzed in this study.

  6. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2201-22.2023

Cited by

1 publication

Public catalog entries on Sciscape.