Eun Jung Hwang1, Richard A Andersen. 1. Division of Biology and Biological Engineering, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91125, USA. eunjung@caltech.edu
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Local field potentials (LFPs) that carry information about the subject's motor intention have the potential to serve as a complement or alternative to spike signals for brain-machine interfaces (BMIs). The goal of this study is to assess the utility of LFPs for BMIs by characterizing the largely unknown information coding properties of multichannel LFPs. APPROACH: Two monkeys were implanted, each with a 16-channel electrode array, in the parietal reach region where both LFPs and spikes are known to encode the subject's intended reach target. We examined how multichannel LFPs recorded during a reach task jointly carry reach target information, and compared the LFP performance to simultaneously recorded multichannel spikes. MAIN RESULTS: LFPs yielded a higher number of channels that were informative about reach targets than spikes. Single channel LFPs provided more accurate target information than single channel spikes. However, LFPs showed significantly larger signal and noise correlations across channels than spikes. Reach target decoders performed worse when using multichannel LFPs than multichannel spikes. The underperformance of multichannel LFPs was mostly due to their larger noise correlation because noise de-correlated multichannel LFPs produced a decoding accuracy comparable to multichannel spikes. Despite the high noise correlation, decoders using LFPs in addition to spikes outperformed decoders using only spikes. SIGNIFICANCE: These results demonstrate that multichannel LFPs could effectively complement spikes for BMI applications by yielding more informative channels. The utility of multichannel LFPs may be further augmented if their high noise correlation can be taken into account by decoders.
OBJECTIVE: Local field potentials (LFPs) that carry information about the subject's motor intention have the potential to serve as a complement or alternative to spike signals for brain-machine interfaces (BMIs). The goal of this study is to assess the utility of LFPs for BMIs by characterizing the largely unknown information coding properties of multichannel LFPs. APPROACH: Two monkeys were implanted, each with a 16-channel electrode array, in the parietal reach region where both LFPs and spikes are known to encode the subject's intended reach target. We examined how multichannel LFPs recorded during a reach task jointly carry reach target information, and compared the LFP performance to simultaneously recorded multichannel spikes. MAIN RESULTS: LFPs yielded a higher number of channels that were informative about reach targets than spikes. Single channel LFPs provided more accurate target information than single channel spikes. However, LFPs showed significantly larger signal and noise correlations across channels than spikes. Reach target decoders performed worse when using multichannel LFPs than multichannel spikes. The underperformance of multichannel LFPs was mostly due to their larger noise correlation because noise de-correlated multichannel LFPs produced a decoding accuracy comparable to multichannel spikes. Despite the high noise correlation, decoders using LFPs in addition to spikes outperformed decoders using only spikes. SIGNIFICANCE: These results demonstrate that multichannel LFPs could effectively complement spikes for BMI applications by yielding more informative channels. The utility of multichannel LFPs may be further augmented if their high noise correlation can be taken into account by decoders.
Authors: Leigh R Hochberg; Daniel Bacher; Beata Jarosiewicz; Nicolas Y Masse; John D Simeral; Joern Vogel; Sami Haddadin; Jie Liu; Sydney S Cash; Patrick van der Smagt; John P Donoghue Journal: Nature Date: 2012-05-16 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Boris Revechkis; Tyson N S Aflalo; Spencer Kellis; Nader Pouratian; Richard A Andersen Journal: J Neural Eng Date: 2014-11-14 Impact factor: 5.379
Authors: Sergey D Stavisky; Jonathan C Kao; Paul Nuyujukian; Stephen I Ryu; Krishna V Shenoy Journal: J Neural Eng Date: 2015-05-06 Impact factor: 5.379
Authors: Sagi Perel; Patrick T Sadtler; Emily R Oby; Stephen I Ryu; Elizabeth C Tyler-Kabara; Aaron P Batista; Steven M Chase Journal: J Neurophysiol Date: 2015-07-01 Impact factor: 2.714
Authors: Ranganatha Sitaram; Tomas Ros; Luke Stoeckel; Sven Haller; Frank Scharnowski; Jarrod Lewis-Peacock; Nikolaus Weiskopf; Maria Laura Blefari; Mohit Rana; Ethan Oblak; Niels Birbaumer; James Sulzer Journal: Nat Rev Neurosci Date: 2016-12-22 Impact factor: 34.870
Authors: Michael F Barbaro; Daniel R Kramer; George Nune; Morgan B Lee; Terrance Peng; Charles Y Liu; Spencer Kellis; Brian Lee Journal: J Clin Neurosci Date: 2019-04-22 Impact factor: 1.961
Authors: János A Perge; Shaomin Zhang; Wasim Q Malik; Mark L Homer; Sydney Cash; Gerhard Friehs; Emad N Eskandar; John P Donoghue; Leigh R Hochberg Journal: J Neural Eng Date: 2014-06-12 Impact factor: 5.379