PreprintCited by 4Neuroscience and Neural EngineeringPain Management and TreatmentTactile and Sensory Interactions

Neural Activity Shaping in Visual Prostheses with Deep Learning

Open access
Castro, Domingos, Grayden, David B., Meffin, Hamish, Spencer, Martin·2023·Journal of Neural Engineering

Preprint — published as 10.1088/1741-2552/ad6186

Abstract

Objective: The visual perception provided by retinal prostheses is poor and limited to images constructed of phosphenes generated by the electrodes. One limiting factor has been the conventional strategy used to encode the target image into a stimulation pattern. Under this strategy, if the electrode density is high, the current spread of neighbouring unipolar stimuli overlaps, leading to blurred images. Simultaneous multipolar stimulation guided by the measured neural responses can attenuate excessive spread of excitation and allows for a more precise electrical input to the retina. However, it is far from trivial to predict what multipolar stimulus pattern will elicit the desired retinal response for a given target image. Here, we propose to solve this problem using an Artificial Neural Network (ANN) that could be trained with data acquired from the implant itself. Approach: Our method consists of two ANNs trained sequentially. The Measurement Predictor Network (MPN) is trained on data from the implant and is used to predict how the retina responds to multipolar stimulation by learning the forward model. The Stimulus Generator Network (STG) is trained on a large dataset of natural images and uses the trained MPN to determine efficient multipolar stimulus patterns by learning the inverse model. We validate our method in silico using a realistic model of retinal response to multipolar stimulation. Main Results: We show that the simulated retinal activations elicited with our ANN-based approach are considerably sharper when compared with the conventional method used in existing devices. The SGN finds multipolar stimulation patterns that are tuned to a specific retina, thus providing patient-specific stimuli. Also, due to its small computational cost, the SGN can output stimulation patterns at a very high rate. Significance: Our novel protocol opens the door to personalized multipolar retinal stimulation, which may improve the visual experience and quality of life of retinal prosthesis users.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1101/2023.12.20.572123

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Alternative stimulation strategies have not been validated in vivo in humans using perceptually relevant pulse-train stimulation, and most do not address the substantial day-to-day variability in cortical responses that limits clinical reliability.

    “While alternative stimulation strategies have been proposed [25–39], none have been validated in vivo in humans using perceptually relevant pulse-train stimulation, and most do not address the substantial day-to-day variability in cortical responses that limits clinical reliability.”

    From Deep Learning–Based Control of Electrically Evoked Activity in Human Visual Cortex (2025) · cites this paper as [33]

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 1 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Previous attempts at electrically evoking targeted neural activity have shown varied success, often limited to simulations, retinal explants, or prefrontal cortex brain states in non-human primates, yet never in awake humans.

    “Previous attempts at electrically evoking targeted neural activity have shown varied success, often limited to simulations [33, 39], retinal explants [27], or prefrontal cortex brain states in non-human primates [49], yet never in awake humans.”

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 47 · Cited by 4

Authors
Castro, D., Grayden, D. B., Meffin, H., & Spencer, M.
Affiliations
  • Universidade do Porto (PT)
  • The University of Melbourne (AU)
Corresponding author
  • Castro, Domingos
  • Grayden, David B.
  • Spencer, Martin
Venue
Journal of Neural Engineering
Publisher
openRxiv
Published
2023-12-21
Volume
21
Issue
4
Pages
046025-046025
ISSN
1741-2552 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4400482291
Cited by
4
References
47
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1
FWCI
0.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Journal of Neural Engineering (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Health and Medical Research Council (2014380)
  • Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (SFRH/BD/143956/2019)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neural Engineering
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Treatment
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Tactile and Sensory Interactions
Keywords
retinal prosthesis, unipolar stimulation, artificial neural networks, spatial resolution, personalized stimulation
MeSH terms
Deep Learning, Humans, Photic Stimulation, Retina, Visual Perception, Neural Networks, Computer, 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