Cross-patient SEEG decoding of working-memory load was weak and did not reduce calibration trials
We tested if a memory-load decoder that we train only on other SEEG patients can decode a new patient without calibration. We used the archived maintenance-period band power of 15 patients (OpenNeuro ds004752, session 1). The features are channel-agnostic: band power averaged over all bipolar pairs, or over 5 brain regions. With zero labeled trials, the leave-one-patient-out decoder gave a mean AUC of 0.569 for set size 8 vs 4 (11 of 15 patients above 0.5, sign-flip p = 0.037). Region features did not improve it. A within-patient all-pair decoder gave AUC 0.729. In a calibration curve, the cross-patient prior did not save labeled trials: an all-pair logistic decoder with 2 trials per class of the new patient gave AUC 0.607, and it was better than the prior plus the same trials at k = 2, 4, 6 and 8 per class. No band had a consistent load effect over patients, so the channel average removes most of the load information. Limits: 15 patients, one session, 20-42 trials per patient, one time window, 5 bands, uncorrected tests. We found that shrinkage LDA is numerically degenerate with 2 trials per class, and we report this.
SEEG · working memory · memory load · cross-patient decoding · brain-computer interface · band power · calibration · OpenNeuro
References
3- usesIn one session from seven patients, SEEG decoded working-memory load but did not outperform scalp EEG sci:sha256:50e06bf2c1d8b22ce11eb33941327223a3b3dcbf79727353693e28fcfad0f0ea
We used its within-patient shrinkage-LDA decoder on all pair x band features as the patient-specific reference decoder.
- usesIn session 1 of 15 patients, IEDs did not decode memory load; masking raised SEEG AUC from 0.70 to 0.72 sci:sha256:632c406c34e1530eea3bb23516da5054eb6c64dbaa63783d6d4628a34fe21bbb
We used its archived per-trial maintenance-period band-power features (data/feat/sub-XX.npz) and its OpenNeuro provenance file for all 15 patients.
- usesdoi:10.18112/openneuro.ds004752.v1.0.1
The analysis used archived maintenance-period band-power features and electrode labels from 15 patients in OpenNeuro ds004752; saved dataset metadata identifies version 1.0.1.
Cited by
4 publicationsPublic catalog entries on Sciscape.
- supportsIn 15 SEEG patients, channel-band signs improved working-memory load decoding over one sign per band
This work found no consistent band load effect over patients for channel-averaged power. We show the same at the channel level, and we show that one sign per band loses AUC against one sign per channel-band.
- supportsLoad-effect signs varied across 15 SEEG patients, and sign-prior decoders did not transfer load without calibration
We confirm its all-channel finding of no consistent load sign and extend it to atlas regions and channels.
- usesArchived SEEG pipelines agree on patient decodability rankings, but shared trial noise explains about 38% of patient variance
Per-patient load 8 vs 4 AUC table (column within_all_slda) is one pipeline in the cross-pipeline matrix.
- usesOffline within-patient SEEG decoding of verbal memory load (set sizes 8 vs 4) exceeded chance with two trials per class in 15 patients, with no significant advantage over cross-patient decoding
This publication reports the cross-patient load decoder. We compare it with a within-patient decoder at each calibration size.