MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Corticospinal excitability is highest at the early rising phase of sensorimotor µ-rhythm

2022· article· en· W4311255680 on OpenAlexafffund
Christoph Zrenner, Gábor Kozák, Natalie Schaworonkow, Johanna Metsomaa, David Baur, David Michael Vetter, Daniel M. Blumberger, Ulf Ziemann, Paolo Belardinelli

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroImage · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersEuropean Research CouncilNational Institutes of HealthBundesministerium für Wirtschaft und EnergieEmil Aaltosen SäätiöFondation Brain CanadaEberhard Karls Universität TübingenEuropean CommissionCentre for Addiction and Mental Health FoundationHorizon 2020Canadian Institutes of Health ResearchKAUTE-Säätiö
KeywordsElectroencephalographyTranscranial magnetic stimulationSensorimotor rhythmNeuroscienceRhythmPsychologyPrimary motor cortexStimulus (psychology)Motor cortexSomatosensory systemScalpAudiologyStimulationPhysicsBrain–computer interfaceMedicineCognitive psychologyAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Alpha oscillations are thought to reflect alternating cortical states of excitation and inhibition. Studies of perceptual thresholds and evoked potentials have shown the scalp EEG negative phase of the oscillation to correspond to a short-lasting low-threshold and high-excitability state of underlying visual, somatosensory, and primary motor cortex. The negative peak of the oscillation is assumed to correspond to the state of highest excitability based on biophysical considerations and considerable effort has been made to improve the extraction of a predictive signal by individually optimizing EEG montages. Here, we investigate whether it is the negative peak of sensorimotor µ-rhythm that corresponds to the highest corticospinal excitability, and whether this is consistent between individuals. In 52 adult participants, a standard 5-channel surface Laplacian EEG montage was used to extract sensorimotor µ-rhythm during transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) of primary motor cortex. Post-hoc trials were sorted from 800 TMS-evoked motor potentials (MEPs) according to the pre-stimulus EEG (estimated instantaneous phase) and MEP amplitude (as an index of corticospinal excitability). Different preprocessing transformations designed to improve the accuracy by which µ-alpha phase predicts excitability were also tested. By fitting a sinusoid to the MEP amplitudes, sorted according to pre-stimulus EEG-phase, we found that excitability was highest during the early rising phase, at a significant delay with respect to the negative peak by on average 45° or 10 ms. The individual phase of highest excitability was consistent across study participants and unaffected by two different EEG-cleaning methods that utilize 64 channels to improve signal quality by compensating for individual noise level and channel covariance. Personalized transformations of the montage did not yield better prediction of excitability from µ-alpha phase. The relationship between instantaneous phase of a brain oscillation and fluctuating cortical excitability appears to be more complex than previously hypothesized. In TMS of motor cortex, a standard surface Laplacian 5-channel EEG montage is effective in extracting a predictive signal and the phase corresponding to the highest excitability appears to be consistent between individuals. This is an encouraging result with respect to the clinical potential of therapeutic personalized brain interventions in the motor system. However, it remains to be investigated, whether similar results can be obtained for other brain areas and brain oscillations targeted with EEG and TMS.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.525
Threshold uncertainty score0.684

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 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

Citations51
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuroImageSame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207