MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2996560686 · doi:10.1038/s42003-019-0707-9

Decoding speech from spike-based neural population recordings in secondary auditory cortex of non-human primates

2019· article· en· W2996560686 on OpenAlexaff
Christopher Heelan, Ji-Hun Lee, Ronan O’Shea, Laurie Lynch, David M. Brandman, Wilson Truccolo, A. V. Nurmikko

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunications Biology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersBrown UniversityAdvanced Research Projects AgencyDefense Advanced Research Projects AgencyU.S. Department of Defense
KeywordsAuditory cortexDecoding methodsNeural decodingComputer scienceSpike sortingPopulationNeural codingBrain–computer interfaceSpeech recognitionNeuroscienceNeocortexSpike (software development)ElectroencephalographyPsychologyArtificial intelligenceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Direct electronic communication with sensory areas of the neocortex is a challenging ambition for brain-computer interfaces. Here, we report the first successful neural decoding of English words with high intelligibility from intracortical spike-based neural population activity recorded from the secondary auditory cortex of macaques. We acquired 96-channel full-broadband population recordings using intracortical microelectrode arrays in the rostral and caudal parabelt regions of the superior temporal gyrus (STG). We leveraged a new neural processing toolkit to investigate the choice of decoding algorithm, neural preprocessing, audio representation, channel count, and array location on neural decoding performance. The presented spike-based machine learning neural decoding approach may further be useful in informing future encoding strategies to deliver direct auditory percepts to the brain as specific patterns of microstimulation.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.811
Threshold uncertainty score0.415

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.287 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations43
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunications BiologySame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207