Cited by 302Motor Control and AdaptationNeural dynamics and brain functionEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces

Functional network reorganization during learning in a brain-computer interface paradigm

Open access
Jarosiewicz, Beata, Chase, Steven M., Fraser, George W., Velliste, Meel, Kass, Robert E., Schwartz, Andrew B.·2008·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

Efforts to study the neural correlates of learning are hampered by the size of the network in which learning occurs. To understand the importance of learning-related changes in a network of neurons, it is necessary to understand how the network acts as a whole to generate behavior. Here we introduce a paradigm in which the output of a cortical network can be perturbed directly and the neural basis of the compensatory changes studied in detail. Using a brain-computer interface, dozens of simultaneously recorded neurons in the motor cortex of awake, behaving monkeys are used to control the movement of a cursor in a three-dimensional virtual-reality environment. This device creates a precise, well-defined mapping between the firing of the recorded neurons and an expressed behavior (cursor movement). In a series of experiments, we force the animal to relearn the association between neural firing and cursor movement in a subset of neurons and assess how the network changes to compensate. We find that changes in neural activity reflect not only an alteration of behavioral strategy but also the relative contributions of individual neurons to the population error signal.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1073/pnas.0808113105

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 36 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Jarosiewicz, B., Chase, S. M., Fraser, G. W., Velliste, M., Kass, R. E., & Schwartz, A. B.
Affiliations
University of Pittsburgh (US)
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2008-12-09
Volume
105
Issue
49
Pages
19486-19491
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W2128675085
Cited by
302
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 19 · 2015: 29 · 2014: 34 · 2013: 22 · 2012: 24
FWCI
8.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5r01eb005847-04)
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NS-2-2346)
  • National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (EB005847, R01-EB005847)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Motor Control and Adaptation
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Keywords
neural learning, brain-computer interface, motor cortex, single-unit recording, behavioral strategies, neural correlates of learning, monkeys
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Animals, Association Learning, Electrodes, Implanted, Macaca mulatta, Male, Models, Neurological, Motor Cortex, Neuronal Plasticity, Psychomotor Performance, User-Computer Interface, Neural Networks, Computer, Prostheses and Implants

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review