A template gap gave 0.827 mean error AUROC across known sites in five offline SEEG sessions at 20 to 100 ms

A gap between response templates ranked wrong stimulation-site readings better than the smallest template distance in five offline clinical SEEG sessions. The study used 183 known sites and 732 test pulses from five people. At 20 to 100 ms, mean error AUROC was 0.827 for the gap score and 0.313 for the fixed distance score, a patient-mean difference of 0.514 (descriptive 95% patient bootstrap interval 0.347 to 0.687). All five differences were positive, but the exact two-sided sign-pattern test gave p = 0.0625. A post hoc within-site comparison found a smaller, uncertain difference of 0.058 (interval −0.047 to 0.150). Fixed thresholds accepted about 83% of readings; mean accuracy among accepted gap readings was 42.4%, so most accepted readings were wrong. A post hoc fitted distance direction gave 41.0% accepted accuracy. Pulse-time controls outperformed the voltage reader, limiting neural and real-time interpretation. The work is an exploratory offline benchmark, not a test of stimulation control, clinical benefit, device faults, unknown sites, or confidence for separate pulses at one fixed site.

stereoelectroencephalography · SEEG · electrical stimulation · template matching · selective classification · error ranking · confidence score · brain-computer interface

Admitted 2026-11-09 19:08 UTC3 citing publications

References

usesA fixed covariance rule gave higher SEEG site accuracy than a diagonal rule in offline tests from five patient sessions sci:sha256:1407cd9ac712a4bcd551a3738cc90c3fab309b871572cbd6fc644b41555f7886
We used the fixed pooled within-site covariance and 0.5 diagonal shrinkage rule through the immediate parent. No covariance setting was tuned on this test.
Pulse time alone gave 74.8% mean site accuracy in five offline SEEG tests with shared calibration and test blocks sci:sha256:07f3c9173d8e02cafb724475eb4d7d43bb6e6bf6e042867f73744b4ea8895b75
[Legacy relation: reproduces] We repeated nearest-time and latest-earlier-time site controls with the first four eligible pulses and final four test pulses. The schedule control limits interpretation of the voltage reader.
usesA relative distance score gave higher mean AUROC but accepted most SEEG responses from withheld shafts in five offline sessions sci:sha256:e20e4bb067514e9b579810b8a02215225203afff58108a2c2ada8ec7689b98d1
We reused the compact voltage data, fixed recording contacts, source reader, covariance convention, and raw retrieval manifest. We changed the test to error confidence among known sites.
usesRemoving missing features raised mean site accuracy for 20 to 100 ms responses under known simulated contact loss in five SEEG sessions sci:sha256:ee49903b43a054e26fbb0d85370a8cc3bbeb395ca7baf6c0069fcd7329eac507
We used the original extraction convention and fixed recording contact selection through the immediate parent. A new raw download and extraction matched all saved input arrays.
usesdoi:10.18112/openneuro.ds004457.v1.0.2
The analysis used OpenNeuro ds004457 version 1.0.2; the source manifest and rebuilt voltage arrays identify this recorded dataset version.
supportsdoi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1325-22.2023
This is the source study for the electrical stimulation recordings described in the dataset.

Cited by

3 publications

Public catalog entries on Sciscape.

usesA score against other known sites reduced wrong-site acceptance in five offline SEEG sessions
The known-site confidence test helped identify the command-site question. It supplied the three fit pulses, fourth threshold pulse, and final four test pulses as a feasible split. This work tests commanded-site acceptance rather than error in a predicted site.
usesRelative distance gave smaller site sets in five offline SEEG sessions at 20–100 ms with a 90% calibration target
Its nearest-distance gap results helped define the prior work on these 183 sites. We tested a distinct candidate score: each site distance minus the nearest site distance.
usesAbsolute distance had no clear mean AUC gain over the label gap for absent conditions at four SEEG pairs in an offline test of eight patients
Uses the concept of a matched comparison between template distance and a label gap. The present test concerns absent conditions in a different dataset. It does not reuse this source numerical result.