MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Fast Optical Signals for Real-Time Retinotopy and Brain Computer Interface

2023· article· en· W4372341360 on OpenAlexaff
David Perpetuini, Mehmet Günal, Nicole Chiou, Oluwasanmi Koyejo, Kyle E. Mathewson, Kathy A. Low, Monica Fabiani, Gabriele Gratton, Antonio Maria Chiarelli

Bibliographic record

VenueBioengineering · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering
KeywordsBrain–computer interfaceComputer scienceRetinotopyArtificial intelligenceVisual cortexSupport vector machinePattern recognition (psychology)Visual fieldComputer visionElectroencephalographyPhysicsNeuroscienceOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A brain-computer interface (BCI) allows users to control external devices through brain activity. Portable neuroimaging techniques, such as near-infrared (NIR) imaging, are suitable for this goal. NIR imaging has been used to measure rapid changes in brain optical properties associated with neuronal activation, namely fast optical signals (FOS) with good spatiotemporal resolution. However, FOS have a low signal-to-noise ratio, limiting their BCI application. Here FOS were acquired with a frequency-domain optical system from the visual cortex during visual stimulation consisting of a rotating checkerboard wedge, flickering at 5 Hz. We used measures of photon count (Direct Current, DC light intensity) and time of flight (phase) at two NIR wavelengths (690 nm and 830 nm) combined with a machine learning approach for fast estimation of visual-field quadrant stimulation. The input features of a cross-validated support vector machine classifier were computed as the average modulus of the wavelet coherence between each channel and the average response among all channels in 512 ms time windows. An above chance performance was obtained when differentiating visual stimulation quadrants (left vs. right or top vs. bottom) with the best classification accuracy of ~63% (information transfer rate of ~6 bits/min) when classifying the superior and inferior stimulation quadrants using DC at 830 nm. The method is the first attempt to provide generalizable retinotopy classification relying on FOS, paving the way for the use of FOS in real-time BCI.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.250 · 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
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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioengineeringSame topicEEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesFrench-language works237,207