Online Bayesian optimization of vagus nerve stimulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objective. In bioelectronic medicine, neuromodulation therapies induce neural signals to the brain or organs, modifying their function. Stimulation devices capable of triggering exogenous neural signals using electrical waveforms require a complex and multi-dimensional parameter space to control such waveforms. Determining the best combination of parameters (waveform optimization or dosing) for treating a particular patient’s illness is therefore challenging. Comprehensive parameter searching for an optimal stimulation effect is often infeasible in a clinical setting due to the size of the parameter space. Restricting this space, however, may lead to suboptimal therapeutic results, reduced responder rates, and adverse effects. Approach. As an alternative to a full parameter search, we present a flexible machine learning, data acquisition, and processing framework for optimizing neural stimulation parameters, requiring as few steps as possible using Bayesian optimization. This optimization builds a model of the neural and physiological responses to stimulations, enabling it to optimize stimulation parameters and provide estimates of the accuracy of the response model. The vagus nerve (VN) innervates, among other thoracic and visceral organs, the heart, thus controlling heart rate (HR), making it an ideal candidate for demonstrating the effectiveness of our approach. Main results. The efficacy of our optimization approach was first evaluated on simulated neural responses, then applied to VN stimulation intraoperatively in porcine subjects. Optimization converged quickly on parameters achieving target HRs and optimizing neural B-fiber activations despite high intersubject variability. Significance. An optimized stimulation waveform was achieved in real time with far fewer stimulations than required by alternative optimization strategies, thus minimizing exposure to side effects. Uncertainty estimates helped avoiding stimulations outside a safe range. Our approach shows that a complex set of neural stimulation parameters can be optimized in real-time for a patient to achieve a personalized precision dosing.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".