MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2784349096 · doi:10.1088/1741-2552/aa9ee7

Rapid calibration of an intracortical brain–computer interface for people with tetraplegia

2018· article· en· W2784349096 on OpenAlexafffund
David M. Brandman, Tommy Hosman, Jad Saab, Michael C. Burkhart, Benjamin E. Shanahan, John G. Ciancibello, Anish A. Sarma, Daniel Milstein, Carlos E. Vargas-Irwin, Brian Franco, Jessica N. Kelemen, Christine H Blabe, Brian Murphy, Daniel R. Young, Francis R. Willett, Chethan Pandarinath, Sergey D. Stavisky, Robert F. Kirsch, Benjamin L. Walter, A. Bolu Ajiboye, Sydney S. Cash, Emad N. Eskandar, Jonathan P. Miller, Jennifer A. Sweet, Krishna V. Shenoy, Jaimie M. Henderson, Beata Jarosiewicz, Matthew Tom Harrison, John D. Simeral, Leigh R. Hochberg

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neural Engineering · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNational Center for Medical Rehabilitation ResearchEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and BioengineeringNational Institute on Deafness and Other Communication DisordersKillam TrustsRehabilitation Research and Development ServiceMassachusetts General HospitalCraig H. Neilsen FoundationNational Science FoundationCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchU.S. Department of Veterans AffairsALS AssociationNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsTetraplegiaBrain–computer interfaceCalibrationComputer scienceInterface (matter)Physical medicine and rehabilitationHuman–computer interactionPsychologyMedicineNeuroscienceSpinal cord injurySpinal cordOperating systemElectroencephalographyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) can enable individuals with tetraplegia to communicate and control external devices. Though much progress has been made in improving the speed and robustness of neural control provided by intracortical BCIs, little research has been devoted to minimizing the amount of time spent on decoder calibration. APPROACH: We investigated the amount of time users needed to calibrate decoders and achieve performance saturation using two markedly different decoding algorithms: the steady-state Kalman filter, and a novel technique using Gaussian process regression (GP-DKF). MAIN RESULTS: Three people with tetraplegia gained rapid closed-loop neural cursor control and peak, plateaued decoder performance within 3 min of initializing calibration. We also show that a BCI-naïve user (T5) was able to rapidly attain closed-loop neural cursor control with the GP-DKF using self-selected movement imagery on his first-ever day of closed-loop BCI use, acquiring a target 37 s after initiating calibration. SIGNIFICANCE: These results demonstrate the potential for an intracortical BCI to be used immediately after deployment by people with paralysis, without the need for user learning or extensive system calibration.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.241 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations165
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neural EngineeringSame topicEEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesFrench-language works237,207