EEG responses induced by cerebellar TMS at rest and during visuomotor adaptation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Connections between the cerebellum and the cortex play a critical role in learning and executing complex behaviours. Dual-coil transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) can be used non-invasively to probe connectivity changes between the lateral cerebellum and motor cortex (M1) using the motor evoked potential as an outcome measure (cerebellar-brain inhibition, CBI). However, it gives no information about cerebellar connections to other parts of cortex. OBJECTIVES: We used electroencephalography (EEG) to investigate whether it was possible to detect activity evoked in any areas of cortex by single-pulse TMS of the cerebellum (cerebellar TMS evoked potentials, cbTEPs). A second experiment tested if these responses were influenced by the performance of a cerebellar-dependent motor learning paradigm. METHODS: In the first series of experiments, TMS was applied over either the right or left cerebellar cortex, and scalp EEG was recorded simultaneously. Control conditions that mimicked auditory and somatosensory inputs associated with cerebellar TMS were included to identify responses due to non-cerebellar sensory stimulation. We conducted a follow-up experiment that evaluated whether cbTEPs are behaviourally sensitive by assessing individuals before and after learning a visuomotor reach adaptation task. RESULTS: A TMS pulse over the lateral cerebellum evoked EEG responses that could be distinguished from those caused by auditory and sensory artefacts. Significant positive (P80) and negative peaks (N110) over the contralateral frontal cerebral area were identified with a mirrored scalp distribution after left vs. right cerebellar stimulation. The P80 and N110 peaks were replicated in the cerebellar motor learning experiment and changed amplitude at different stages of learning. The change in amplitude of the P80 peak was associated with the degree of learning that individuals retained following adaptation. Due to overlap with sensory responses, the N110 should be interpreted with caution. CONCLUSIONS: Cerebral potentials evoked by TMS of the lateral cerebellum provide a neurophysiological probe of cerebellar function that complements the existing CBI method. They may provide novel insight into mechanisms of visuomotor adaptation and other cognitive processes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".