The spatiotemporal evolution of TMS-evoked potentials reflects direct cortical activation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) evokes electroencephalographic (EEG) responses that can persist for hundreds of milliseconds. While the first 80 ms after the pulse are widely accepted to reflect genuine cortical responses to TMS, later components have mainly been attributed to the effects of sensory co-stimulations. Here we reappraise this view by investigating the target-specificity of the spatiotemporal evolution of TMS-evoked potentials (TEPs). To this end, we compared TEPs elicited by targeting the premotor and primary motor cortices in 16 healthy subjects, under conditions designed to optimize TMS effectiveness on the cortex while minimizing peripheral confounds. As a counterfactual, we conducted the same comparison on the EEG responses evoked by realistic sham TMS and high-intensity somatosensory scalp stimulation. We found that EEG responses to motor and premotor TMS can exhibit distinct spatiotemporal evolutions, lasting up to 300 ms, both at the group and single-subject levels. These differences were absent or marginally detectable in both realistic sham TMS and high-intensity somatosensory scalp stimulation. Our findings suggest that, when effectiveness is optimized and peripheral confounds are controlled, TMS elicits specific long-lasting genuine EEG responses that reflect the initial engagement of specific cortical targets. These results challenge previous assumptions and highlight how TMS-EEG can be reliably used to assess large-scale properties within corticothalamic networks.
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) | 0.002 | 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".