MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4398781322 · doi:10.1017/cjn.2024.183

P.077 Reducing artifact during in bi-directional brain interfacing

2024· article· en· W4398781322 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Katherine Tourigny, Timothy Denison

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeurological disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtifact (error)InterfacingLocal field potentialComputer scienceDeep brain stimulationBrain–computer interfaceBrain activity and meditationArtificial intelligenceNeuroscienceElectroencephalographyMedicinePsychologyComputer hardware

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Bi-directional brain interfacing (closed loop DBS) is a modern focus of neuroengineering research. Most current clinical systems are open loop, allowing one way communication from the IPG battery to the brain. Bi-directional systems allow both stimulation and recording of neural activity (local field potential, LFP). The system algorithm can measure known pathologic LFPs to guide change in stimulation. However, recording LFPs from the brain encounters electrical artifact from the heart. Reducing artifact is imperative to accurate measurement of neural activity. Artifact will cause the bi-directional system to miscalculate stimulation parameters. This project evaluated reduction of artifact by moving the IPG further away from the heart in a device implanted into the skull. Methods: LFP data from ongoing clinical trials was collected and analysed for artifact using open source code. Anatomic targets include STN, PPN, CMT, and PAG. Results: Cardiac artifact is reduced in skull mounted DBS as shown by power spectral density of LFPs in each region. Conclusions: This project shows the importance of surgical placement of DBS sensing devices to reduce cardiac artifact in bi-directional brain interfacing. This has important engineering and surgical design implications for safety and performance as the field of closed loop DBS transitions from research to clinical settings.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.005

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques→Same topicNeurological disorders and treatments→French-language works237,207→