Mapping cognitive activity from electrocorticography field potentials in humans performing NBack task
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objective . Advancements in data science and assistive technologies have made invasive brain-computer interfaces (iBCIs) increasingly viable for enhancing the quality of life in physically disabled individuals. Intracortical microelectrode implants are a common choice for such a communication system due to their fine temporal and spatial resolution. The small size of these implants makes the implantation plan critical for the successful exfiltration of information, particularly when targeting representations of task goals that lack robust anatomical correlates. Approach . Working memory processes including encoding, retrieval, and maintenance are observed in many areas of the brain. Using human electrocorticography (ECoG) recordings during a working memory experiment, we provide proof that it is possible to localize cognitive activity associated with the task and to identify key locations involved with executive memory functions. Results. From the analysis, we could propose an optimal iBCI implant location with the desired features. The general approach is not limited to working memory but could also be used to map other goal-encoding factors such as movement intentions, decision-making, and visual-spatial attention. Significance . Deciphering the intended action of a BCI user is a complex challenge that involves the extraction and integration of cognitive factors such as movement planning, working memory, visual-spatial attention, and the decision state. Examining field potentials from ECoG electrodes while participants engaged in tailored cognitive tasks can pinpoint location with valuable information related to anticipated actions. This manuscript demonstrates the feasibility of identifying electrodes involved in cognitive activity related to working memory during user engagement in the NBack task. Devoting time in meticulous preparation to identify the optimal brain regions for BCI implant locations will increase the likelihood of rich signal outcomes, thereby improving the overall BCI user experience.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".