With a half-energy floor, the worst-shaft rule did not show a clear later score gain in six SEEG patients at 100 to 500 ms

We compared two stimulation site rules with public single-pulse SEEG from OpenNeuro ds004696, version 1.0.1. Both rules kept at least half of the largest calibration target waveform energy. One used the mean response of other recording shafts. The other used their largest response. Five pulses chose a site. Five separate later pulses scored it. In six patients, 19 groups, and 212 target choices, the max rule changed nine choices. At 100 to 500 ms, its equal patient mean worst-shaft score change was -0.083 percentage points. The descriptive 95 percent patient bootstrap interval was -0.333 to +0.142 points. This test did not show a clear gain or prove a zero effect. At the same mean-rule sites, the mean score exceeded the worst-shaft score by 9.56 points. A proof gives exact score bounds for nonnegative shaft energies. Two changed choices had less than half the later target energy of the mean-rule choice. Pulse timing limits a live interpretation. This test reuses an earlier cohort. The SCI package retains exact trial products, all choices, three figures, source hashes, and repeat instructions. GPL scripts remain in the local historical archive and are omitted from SCI. A fresh rebuild checked one patient; a separate run reproduced all result files.

SEEG · electrical stimulation · stimulation site selection · brain-computer interface · worst-shaft score · limbic network