MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Denoising and decoding spontaneous vagus nerve recordings with machine learning

2023· article· en· W4389542854 on OpenAlexaff
Mafalda Ribeiro, Ryan G. L. Koh, Tom Donnelly, Christof Lutteroth, Michael J. Proulx, Paulo R. F. Rocha, Benjamin Metcalfe

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVagus Nerve Stimulation Research
Canadian institutionsToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity Health Network
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
KeywordsAutoencoderComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceNeuromodulationNoise (video)Pattern recognition (psychology)Decoding methodsArtificial neural networkNoise reductionSpeech recognitionAlgorithmNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Neural interfaces that electrically stimulate the peripheral nervous system have been shown to successfully improve symptom management for several conditions, such as epilepsy and depression. A crucial part for closing the loop and improving the efficacy of implantable neuromodulation devices is the efficient extraction of meaningful information from nerve recordings, which can have a low Signal-to-Noise ratio (SNR) and non-stationary noise. In recent years, machine learning (ML) models have shown outstanding performance in regression and classification problems, but it is often unclear how to translate and assess these for novel tasks in biomedical engineering. This paper aims to adapt existing ML algorithms to carry out unsupervised denoising of neural recordings instead. This is achieved by applying bandpass filtering and two novel ML algorithms to in-vivo spontaneous, low-SNR vagus nerve recordings. The performance of each approach is compared using the task of extracting respiratory afferent activity and validated using cross-correlation, MSE, and accuracy in terms of extracting the true respiratory rate. A variational autoencoder (VAE) model in particular produces results that show better correlation with respiratory activity compared to bandpass filtering, highlighting that these models have the potential to preserve relevant features in complex neural recordings.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.833
Threshold uncertainty score0.430

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.303
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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVagus Nerve Stimulation ResearchFrench-language works237,207