MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394570996 · doi:10.3389/fnetp.2024.1356653

Model-based closed-loop control of thalamic deep brain stimulation

2024· article· en· W4394570996 on OpenAlex
Yupeng Tian, Srikar Saradhi, Edward M. Bello, Matthew D. Johnson, G.M.T. D’Eleuterio, Miloš R. Popović, Milad Lankarany

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Network Physiology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeurological disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsOntario Brain InstituteToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchAzrieli FoundationNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFondation Brain Canada
KeywordsDeep brain stimulationComputer scienceEssential tremorMovement disordersParkinson's diseaseNeurophysiologyController (irrigation)Subthalamic nucleusNeuroscienceArtificial intelligencePhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychologyMedicineDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Closed-loop control of deep brain stimulation (DBS) is beneficial for effective and automatic treatment of various neurological disorders like Parkinson’s disease (PD) and essential tremor (ET). Manual (open-loop) DBS programming solely based on clinical observations relies on neurologists’ expertise and patients’ experience. Continuous stimulation in open-loop DBS may decrease battery life and cause side effects. On the contrary, a closed-loop DBS system uses a feedback biomarker/signal to track worsening (or improving) of patients’ symptoms and offers several advantages compared to the open-loop DBS system. Existing closed-loop DBS control systems do not incorporate physiological mechanisms underlying DBS or symptoms, e.g., how DBS modulates dynamics of synaptic plasticity. Methods: In this work, we propose a computational framework for development of a model-based DBS controller where a neural model can describe the relationship between DBS and neural activity and a polynomial-based approximation can estimate the relationship between neural and behavioral activities. A controller is used in our model in a quasi-real-time manner to find DBS patterns that significantly reduce the worsening of symptoms. By using the proposed computational framework, these DBS patterns can be tested clinically by predicting the effect of DBS before delivering it to the patient. We applied this framework to the problem of finding optimal DBS frequencies for essential tremor given electromyography (EMG) recordings solely. Building on our recent network model of ventral intermediate nuclei (Vim), the main surgical target of the tremor, in response to DBS, we developed neural model simulation in which physiological mechanisms underlying Vim–DBS are linked to symptomatic changes in EMG signals. By using a proportional–integral–derivative (PID) controller, we showed that a closed-loop system can track EMG signals and adjust the stimulation frequency of Vim–DBS so that the power of EMG reaches a desired control target. Results and discussion: We demonstrated that the model-based DBS frequency aligns well with that used in clinical studies. Our model-based closed-loop system is adaptable to different control targets and can potentially be used for different diseases and personalized systems.

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.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.163
Threshold uncertainty score0.459

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.256
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