MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4283780716 · doi:10.1101/2022.06.28.497834

Modelling Instantaneous Firing Rate of DBS Target Neuronal Ensembles in Basal Ganglia and Thalamus

2022· preprint· en· W4283780716 on OpenAlexafffund
Yupeng Tian, Matthew J. H. Murphy, Leon A Steiner, Suneil K. Kalia, Mojgan Hodaie, Andrés M. Lozano, William D. Hutchison, Popovic Milos R., Milosevic Luka, Lankarany Milad

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2022
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeurological disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaBerlin Institute of HealthDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftDeutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst
KeywordsSubthalamic nucleusDeep brain stimulationNeuroscienceBasal gangliaLocal field potentialMicroelectrodeThalamusComputer scienceNeurophysiologyEssential tremorBiological systemPhysicsParkinson's diseaseBiologyMedicineCentral nervous system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Objective Deep Brain Stimulation (DBS) is an effective treatment for movement disorders, including Parkinson’s disease and essential tremor. However, the underlying mechanisms of DBS remain elusive. Despite the capability of existing models in interpreting experimental data qualitatively, there are very few unified computational models that quantitatively capture the dynamics of the neuronal activity of varying stimulated nuclei—including subthalamic nucleus (STN), substantia nigra pars reticulata (SNr) and ventral intermediate nucleus (Vim)—across different DBS frequencies. Materials and Methods Both synthetic and experimental data were utilized in the model fitting; the synthetic data were generated by an established spiking neuron model that was reported in our previous work 1 , and the experimental data were provided using single-unit microelectrode recordings (MER) during DBS (microelectrode stimulation). Based on these data, we developed a novel mathematical model to represent the firing rate of neurons receiving DBS, including neurons in STN, SNr and Vim—across different DBS frequencies. In our model, the DBS pulses were filtered through a synapse model and a nonlinear transfer function to formulate the firing rate variability. For each DBS-targeted nucleus, we fitted a single set of optimal model parameters consistent across varying DBS frequencies. Results Our model accurately reproduced the firing rates observed and calculated from both synthetic and experimental data. The optimal model parameters were consistent across different DBS frequencies. Conclusion The result of our model fitting were in agreement with experimental single-unit microelectrode recording data during DBS. Reproducing neuronal firing rates of different nuclei of the basal ganglia and thalamus during DBS can be helpful to further understand the mechanisms of DBS, and to potentially optimize stimulation parameters based on their actual effects on neuronal activity.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicNeurological disorders and treatments→French-language works237,207→