MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386583679 · doi:10.1101/2023.09.07.556727

Local field potentials in human motor and non-motor brain areas encode the direction of upcoming movements: An intracerebral EEG classification study

2023· preprint· en· W4386583679 on OpenAlexafffund
Etienne Combrisson, Franck Di Rienzo, Anne-Lise Saive, Marcela Perrone‐Bertolotti, Juan L. P. Soto, Philippe Kahane, Jean-Philippe Lachaux, Aymeric Guillot, Karim Jerbi

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaInstitut de Valorisation des DonnéesMinistério da EducaçãoCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível SuperiorCanada Research ChairsUS-UK Fulbright CommissionMinistère de l'Économie, de la Science et de l'Innovation - QuébecCompute Canada
KeywordsLocal field potentialPremotor cortexDecoding methodsElectroencephalographyNeuroscienceComputer scienceBrain–computer interfaceMotor cortexPsychologyArtificial intelligenceBiologyDorsum

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Limb movement direction can be inferred from motor cortex activity. In humans, such decoding has been predominantly demonstrated using the spectral power of electrophysiological signals recorded in sensorimotor areas during movement execution. Yet, it remains unclear to what extent intended hand movement direction can be predicted from brain signals recorded during movement planning. Furthermore, whether other oscillatory features beyond power are also involved in direction encoding is not fully understood. Here, we set out to probe the directional-tuning of oscillatory phase, amplitude and Phase-Amplitude Coupling (PAC) during motor planning and execution, using a machine learning framework on multi-site local field potentials (LFPs) in humans. To this end, we recorded intracranial EEG data from implanted epilepsy patients as they performed a four-direction delayed center-out motor task. We found that LFP power significantly predicted hand-movement direction at execution but also during planning. While successful classification during planning primarily involved low-frequency power in a fronto-parietal circuit, decoding during execution was largely mediated by higher frequency activity in motor and premotor areas. Interestingly, LFP phase at very low frequencies (<1.5 Hz) led to significant decoding in premotor brain regions during execution. The machine learning framework also showed PAC to be uniformly modulated across directions through the task. Cross-temporal generalization analyses revealed that several stable brain patterns in prefrontal and premotor brain regions encode directions across both planning and execution. Finally, multivariate classification led to an increase in overall decoding accuracy (>80%) during both planning and execution. The novel insights revealed here extend our understanding of the role of neural oscillations in encoding motor plans.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicEEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesFrench-language works237,207