MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2901839495 · doi:10.1101/469874

Classification of naturally evoked compound action potentials in peripheral nerve spatiotemporal recordings

2018· preprint· en· W2901839495 on OpenAlexafffund
Ryan G. L. Koh, Adrian Nachman, José Zariffa

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2018
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neural Engineering
Canadian institutionsToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsPattern recognition (psychology)Sensory systemPeripheralSciatic nerveComputer scienceNeuroscienceSural nerveBiomedical engineeringArtificial intelligenceMedicineAnatomyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Peripheral neural signals have the potential to provide the necessary motor, sensory or autonomic information for robust control in many neuroprosthetic and neuromodulation applications. However, developing methods to recover information encoded in these signals is a significant challenge. We introduce the idea of using spatiotemporal signatures extracted from multi-contact nerve cuff electrode recordings to classify naturally evoked compound action potentials (CAP). 9 Long-Evan rats were implanted with a 56-channel nerve cuff on the sciatic nerve. Afferent activity was selectively evoked in the different fascicles of the sciatic nerve (tibial, peroneal, sural) using mechano-sensory stimuli. Spatiotemporal signatures of recorded CAPs were used to train three different classifiers. Performance was measured based on the classification accuracy, F 1 -score, and the ability to reconstruct original firing rates of neural pathways. The mean classification accuracies, for a 3-class problem, for the best performing classifier was 0.686 ± 0.126 and corresponding mean F 1 -score was 0.605 ± 0.212. The mean Pearson correlation coefficients between the original firing rates and estimated firing rates found for the best classifier was 0.728 ± 0.276. The proposed method demonstrates the possibility of classifying individual naturally evoked CAPs in peripheral neural signals recorded from extraneural electrodes, allowing for more precise control signals in neuroprosthetic applications.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.229
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicNeuroscience and Neural EngineeringFrench-language works237,207