MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

TAAC - TMS Adaptable Auditory Control: A universal tool to mask TMS clicks

2022· article· en· W4212793392 on OpenAlexafffund
Simone Russo, Simone Sarasso, Giuseppina Emma Puglisi, Doriana Dal Palù, Andrea Pigorini, Silvia Casarotto, Sasha D’Ambrosio, Arianna Astolfi, Marcello Massimini, Mario Rosanova, Matteo Fecchio

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience Methods · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
FundersHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeRegione LombardiaFondazione per la Ricerca BiomedicaEuropean CommissionFondazione Regionale per la Ricerca BiomedicaTiny Blue Dot FoundationCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
KeywordsTranscranial magnetic stimulationComputer scienceMasking (illustration)ElectroencephalographySpeech recognitionNoise (video)Artificial intelligencePsychologyStimulationNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Coupling transcranial magnetic stimulation with electroencephalography (TMS-EEG) allows recording the EEG response to a direct, non-invasive cortical perturbation. However, obtaining a genuine TMS-evoked EEG potential requires controlling for several confounds, among which a main source is represented by the auditory evoked potentials (AEPs) associated to the TMS discharge noise (TMS click). This contaminating factor can be in principle prevented by playing a masking noise through earphones. NEW METHOD: Here we release TMS Adaptable Auditory Control (TAAC), a highly flexible, open-source, Matlab®-based interface that generates in real-time customized masking noises. TAAC creates noises starting from the stimulator-specific TMS click and tailors them to fit the individual, subject-specific click perception by mixing and manipulating the standard noises in both time and frequency domains. RESULTS: We showed that TAAC allows us to provide standard as well as customized noises able to effectively and safely mask the TMS click. COMPARISON WITH EXISTING METHODS: Here, we showcased two customized noises by comparing them to two standard noises previously used in the TMS literature (i.e., a white noise and a noise generated from the stimulator-specific TMS click only). For each, we quantified the Sound Pressure Level (SPL; measured by a Head and Torso Simulator - HATS) required to mask the TMS click in a population of 20 healthy subjects. Both customized noises were effective at safe (according to OSHA and NIOSH safety guidelines) and lower SPLs with respect to standard noises. CONCLUSIONS: At odds with previous methods, TAAC allows creating effective and safe masking noises specifically tailored on each TMS device and subject. The combination of TAAC with tools for the real-time visualization of TEPs can help control the influence of auditory confounds also in non-compliant patients. Finally, TAAC is a highly flexible and open-source tool, so it can be further extended to meet different experimental requirements.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.298 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations129
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neuroscience MethodsSame topicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesFrench-language works237,207