Biologically plausible phosphene simulation for the differentiable optimization of visual cortical prostheses
Open accessPreprint — published as 10.7554/elife.85812 · Paper page
Abstract
Blindness affects millions of people around the world, and is expected to become increasingly prevalent in the years to come. For some blind individuals, a promising solution to restore a form of vision are cortical visual prostheses, which convert camera input to electrical stimulation of the cortex to bypass part of the impaired visual system. Due to the constrained number of electrodes that can be implanted, the artificially induced visual percept (a pattern of localized light flashes, or ‘phosphenes’) is of limited resolution, and a great portion of the field’s research attention is devoted to optimizing the efficacy, efficiency, and practical usefulness of the encoding of visual information. A commonly exploited method is the non-invasive functional evaluation in sighted subjects or with computational models by making use of simulated prosthetic vision (SPV) pipelines. Although the SPV literature has provided us with some fundamental insights, an important drawback that researchers and clinicians may encounter is the lack of realism in the simulation of cortical prosthetic vision, which limits the validity for real-life applications. Moreover, none of the existing simulators address the specific practical requirements for the electrical stimulation parameters. In this study, we developed a PyTorch-based, fast and fully differentiable phosphene simulator. Our simulator transforms specific electrode stimulation patterns into biologically plausible representations of the artificial visual percepts that the prosthesis wearer is expected to see. The simulator integrates a wide range of both classical and recent clinical results with neurophysiological evidence in humans and non-human primates. The implemented pipeline includes a model of the retinotopic organisation and cortical magnification of the visual cortex. Moreover, the quantitative effect of stimulation strength, duration, and frequency on phosphene size and brightness as well as the temporal characteristics of phosphenes are incorporated in the simulator. Our results demonstrate the suitability of the simulator for both computational applications such as end-to-end deep learning-based prosthetic vision optimization as well as behavioural experiments. The modular approach of our work makes it ideal for further integrating new insights in artificial vision as well as for hypothesis testing. In summary, we present an open-source, fully differentiable, biologically plausible phosphene simulator as a tool for computational, clinical and behavioural neuroscientists working on visual neuroprosthetics.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
The model predictions are similar to those made by others using simpler models that assume phosphene size is inversely proportional to cortical magnification.
“our model predictions are similar to those made by others24,83 using simpler models that assume that phosphene size is inversely proportional to cortical magnification.”
From A virtual patient simulation modeling the neural and perceptual effects of human visual cortical stimulation, from pulse trains to percepts (2024) · cites this paper as [83]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 112 · Cited by 39
Research works printed but not linked: 6
- Jacob Granley, Lucas Relic, and Michael Beyeler. Hybrid Neural Autoencoders for Stimulus Encoding in Visual and Other Sensory Neuroprostheses. arXiv (preprint), pages 1-21, may 2022.
- Jonathan Winawer and Josef Parvizi. Linking Electrical Stimulation of Human Primary Vi- sual Cortex, Size of Affected Cortical Area, Neuronal Responses, and Subjective Experi- ence. Neuron, 92(6):1213-1219, dec 2016. ISSN 08966273. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2016. 11.008. · DOI · Paper page
- Melani Sanchez-Garcia, Roberto Morollon-Ruiz, Ruben Martinez-Cantin, Jose J. Guerrero, and Eduardo Fernandez-Jover. Assessing visual acuity in visual prostheses through a virtual-reality system. arXiv (preprint), pages 1-19, may 2022.
- Jacob Granley, Alexander Riedel, and Michael Beyeler. Adapting Brain-Like Neural Net- works for Modeling Cortical Visual Prostheses. arXiv (preprint), sep 2022.
- Rick van Hoof. The brain as image processor and generator. PhD thesis, Maastricht Uni- versity, 2022.
- Sungshin Kim, Thierri Callier, and Sliman J Bensmaia. A computational model that predicts behavioral sensitivity to intracortical microstimulation. Journal of Neural Engineering, 14(1): 016012, feb 2017. ISSN 1741-2560. doi: 10.1088/1741-2552/14/1/016012. · DOI · Paper page
- Authors
- van der Grinten, M., de Ruyter van Steveninck, J., Lozano, A., Pijnacker, L., Rückauer, B., Roelfsema, P., van Gerven, M., van Wezel, R., Güçlü, U., & Güçlütürk, Y.
- Affiliations
- Netherlands Institute for Neuroscience (NL)
- Radboud University Nijmegen (NL)
- Venue
- eLife
- Publisher
- openRxiv
- Published
- 2022-12-23
- Volume
- 13
- ISSN
- 2050-084X (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC10883675
- OpenAlex
- W4392034091
- Cited by
- 39
- References
- 112
- Citations by year
- 2026: 12 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 5
- FWCI
- 5.93
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- eLife (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Pure Amsterdam UMC (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
- University of Twente Research Information (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- KNAW Research Portal (The Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- VU Research Portal (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Funders
- European Commission (899287, 650003, HORIZON2020)
- Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (P15-42 &apos, 17619 'INTENSE', 024.005.022 &apos, 024.005.022 'DBI2', 823-02-010, P15-42 'NESTOR', P15-42, 17619 &apos, DBI2&apos, 024.005.022, 17619)
- Horizon 2020 Framework Programme (650003)
- HORIZON EUROPE Excellent Science (899287 &apos, 899287 'NeuraViper')
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neural Engineering
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Tactile and Sensory Interactions
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
- Keywords
- simulated prosthetic vision, retinotopic organization, cortical magnification, differentiable simulation, blindness, stimulation parameters, real-time simulation
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Blindness, Computer Simulation, Humans, Phosphenes, Software, Visual Prosthesis
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