Back

Patient-Calibrated Dynamical Modeling and Embedded Trend-Zone Predictive Control for Closed-Loop Deep Brain Stimulation in Parkinson's Disease

Fan, Y.; Guan, L.; Wu, Y.; Luo, X.; Yu, H.; Li, L.

2026-05-21 neuroscience
10.64898/2026.05.19.726196 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Closed-loop deep brain stimulation (cDBS) for Parkinsons disease requires control strategies that tolerate noisy sensing, patient-specific stimulation responses, medication-related fluctuations, and embedded hardware constraints. We developed a patient-calibrated minute-scale dynamical model of subthalamic beta activity and an embedded explicit trend-zone predictive controller, eTZPC. The model combined a basal-ganglia mechanistic prior with stimulation-amplitude and medication-cycle recordings from five patients, and incorporated individualized stimulation-{beta}STN maps, fast- and slow-timescale stimulation responses, levodopa-related modulation, background drift, and observation noise. eTZPC was designed to maintain {beta}STN activity within a patient-specific target zone under stimulation-amplitude, step-size, and quantization constraints. Compared with dual-threshold (DT) and proportional-integral-derivative (PID) controllers across four disturbance scenarios, eTZPC achieved target-zone regulation close to PID while reducing stimulation-switching burden toward the low-switching profile of DT. Ablation analyses identified distinct contributions of smoothing, trend prediction, patient-specific action modeling, and embedded explicit implementation. Parameter-mismatch tests showed that eTZPC was relatively robust to dynamic and disturbance-parameter deviations, but remained sensitive to errors in the steady-state stimulation-{beta}STN map. Patient-in-the-loop recordings in five patients further confirmed execution consistency and compliance with stimulation-boundary and step-size constraints. These findings support patient-calibrated dynamical modeling combined with low-complexity explicit control as a feasible framework for further embedded cDBS evaluation.

Matching journals

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

1
Journal of Neural Engineering
197 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
18.4%
2
Brain Stimulation
112 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
14.2%
3
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 23%
8.3%
4
IEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics
34 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
4.8%
5
Advanced Science
249 papers in training set
Top 4%
4.8%
50% of probability mass above
6
Nature Biomedical Engineering
42 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.9%
7
Communications Biology
886 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.6%
8
Imaging Neuroscience
242 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.6%
9
Nature Machine Intelligence
61 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
3.6%
10
Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
53 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
3.0%
11
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 11%
2.8%
12
NeuroImage
813 papers in training set
Top 3%
2.6%
13
IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering
38 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.9%
14
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 53%
1.9%
15
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 43%
1.7%
16
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 58%
1.3%
17
Cell Reports
1338 papers in training set
Top 27%
1.3%
18
Frontiers in Neuroscience
223 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.1%
19
Brain
154 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.1%
20
Human Brain Mapping
295 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
21
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 48%
0.6%
22
npj Parkinson's Disease
89 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%