Back

A Scalable Framework for Closed-Loop Neuromodulation with Deep Learning

Gebodh, N.; Miskovic, V.; Laszlo, S.; Datta, A.; Bikson, M.

2023-01-20 neuroscience
10.1101/2023.01.18.524615 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Closed-loop neuromodulation measures dynamic neural or physiological activity to optimize interventions for clinical and nonclinical behavioral, cognitive, wellness, attentional, or general task performance enhancement. Conventional closed-loop stimulation approaches can contain biased biomarker detection (decoders and error-based triggering) and stimulation-type application. We present and verify a novel deep learning framework for designing and deploying flexible, data-driven, automated closed-loop neuromodulation that is scalable using diverse datasets, agnostic to stimulation technology (supporting multi-modal stimulation: tACS, tDCS, tFUS, TMS), and without the need for personalized ground-truth performance data. Our approach is based on identified periods of responsiveness - detected states that result in a change in performance when stimulation is applied compared to no stimulation. To demonstrate our framework, we acquire, analyze, and apply a data-driven approach to our open sourced GX dataset, which includes concurrent physiological (ECG, EOG) and neuronal (EEG) measures, paired with continuous vigilance/attention-fatigue tracking, and High-Definition transcranial electrical stimulation (HD-tES). Our frameworks decision process for intervention application identified 88.26% of trials as correct applications, showed potential improvement with varying stimulation types, or missed opportunities to stimulate, whereas 11.25% of trials were predicted to stimulate at inopportune times. With emerging datasets and stimulation technologies, our unifying and integrative framework; leveraging deep learning (Convolutional Neural Networks - CNNs); demonstrates the adaptability and feasibility of automated multimodal neuromodulation for both clinical and nonclinical applications.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.