Training for assumed 30 to 70 ms delays did not establish lower theta phase loss in seven SEEG rest recordings
We tested linear theta phase filters in seven public SEEG rest recordings. The primary test assumed 21 equally likely delays from about 30 to 70 ms. Mean expected cosine loss was 0.6109 with one-delay training and 0.6117 with delay-range training. The mean reduction was -0.000768; four of seven people improved. The exact person sign-flip test gave p = 0.859375. The test did not establish lower loss. A proof divides loss into an unknown-delay floor and loss above that floor. The floor was 0.1352 and used future voltage. A secondary 0 to 100 ms test had a small reduction in all seven people. The package includes verified voltage, code, filters, scores, figures, and reproduction instructions. The cohort and later test interval were reused from prior work. The delays were assumed. No pulse or device timing was measured. This version corrects file checking after AutoSci retrieval.
SEEG · theta phase forecasting · unknown delay · delay uncertainty · cosine loss · ridge regression · phase prediction
References
5- usesDelay compensation reduced mean simulated pulse phase error in seven SEEG rest recordings with an assumed 50 ms delay sci:sha256:138047da1c20ac8429cec6d8ed2face926ee8dd1ead90581a587d86101806445
The fixed-delay pulse simulation helped define the unknown-delay question. We did not reuse its pulse events. We tested assumed delay ranges at fixed cutoffs.
- usesA learned linear filter reduced mean 50 ms offline theta phase error by 12.54 degrees in seven SEEG rest recordings sci:sha256:681793db790925fefcdd246f20a125cf7ec0a4d0c7ac415b89cd84c8e64b5d35
We used the exact selected voltage, source records, feature rule, phase reference, ridge baseline, and retrieval code. We checked the raw source again. The new study tested unknown delay and reproduced the nominal 50 ms filters.
- supersedesTraining for assumed 30 to 70 ms delays did not establish lower theta phase loss in seven SEEG rest recordings sci:sha256:15076f94c53ae9a515aff599474ba9a1bfdbbcfaf6ecbbf8d130c3d597774e6a
This version corrects the file inventory check. The check now excludes the metadata folder added by AutoSci retrieval. The voltage, filters, and numerical results match the earlier record.
- usesdoi:10.18112/openneuro.ds006065.v1.0.0
The publication uses the first 590 seconds of seven recordings from this exact OpenNeuro dataset version; the complete selected source files were checked against pinned objects and hashes.
- doi:10.1038/s41467-025-59417-7
Cited by
3 publicationsPublic catalog entries on Sciscape.
- usesFits to eleven requested 25–75 ms delays reduced mean offline theta phase loss across files from 36 SEEG patients under an independent delay law
Its reviewed negative 30–70 ms result in seven ds006065 records supplied evidence context for the moderate-delay question. Its description also states the mean-vector target, exact loss decomposition, and symmetric-oscillator calculation. We cite that prior method and limit universal claims. No numerical file or code was imported from it.
- usesAn early amplitude gate selected times with higher phase success but lower successful yield in seven SEEG rest pairs under assumed 30 to 70 ms delays and a 2 s offline reference
Its assumed 30 to 70 ms arrival range motivated the delay scope. Our score requires one angle to meet a 45 degree limit at every sampled arrival. Its average phase-loss comparison is not reproduced.
- usesOne phase estimate could not meet a 45 degree limit across unknown 30 to 70 ms delays at 47.8% of test times in seven SEEG rest pairs with a 2 s offline theta filter
Its average phase-loss study defined the unknown-delay question. We used it as a conceptual prior. We tested a separate maximum angular error requirement with no delay distribution. We did not reuse its pair selection, longer test recordings, or fitted readers.