Cited by 157EEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesNeuroscience and Neural EngineeringMuscle activation and electromyography studies

Detecting Neural-State Transitions Using Hidden Markov Models for Motor Cortical Prostheses

Open access
Kemere, Caleb, Santhanam, Gopal, Yu, Byron M., Afshar, Afsheen, Ryu, Stephen I., Meng, Teresa H., Shenoy, Krishna V.·2008·Journal of Neurophysiology

Abstract

Neural prosthetic interfaces use neural activity related to the planning and perimovement epochs of arm reaching to afford brain-directed control of external devices. Previous research has primarily centered on accurately decoding movement intention from either plan or perimovement activity, but has assumed that temporal boundaries between these epochs are known to the decoding system. In this work, we develop a technique to automatically differentiate between baseline, plan, and perimovement epochs of neural activity. Specifically, we use a generative model of neural activity to capture how neural activity varies between these three epochs. Our approach is based on a hidden Markov model (HMM), in which the latent variable (state) corresponds to the epoch of neural activity, coupled with a state-dependent Poisson firing model. Using an HMM, we demonstrate that the time of transition from baseline to plan epochs, a transition in neural activity that is not accompanied by any external behavior changes, can be detected using a threshold on the a posteriori HMM state probabilities. Following detection of the plan epoch, we show that the intended target of a center-out movement can be detected about as accurately as that by a maximum-likelihood estimator using a window of known plan activity. In addition, we demonstrate that our HMM can detect transitions in neural activity corresponding to targets not found in training data. Thus the HMM technique for automatically detecting transitions between epochs of neural activity enables prosthetic interfaces that can operate autonomously.

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 · 10.1152/jn.00924.2007

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

  • LIFEs have been recently used to control artificial devices showing good results during short-term trials with human amputees.

    “In fact, after appropriate control in experimental models to test their biocompatibility and efficacy [18], LIFEs have been recently used to control artificial devices [6,7,22-25] showing good results during short-term trials with human amputees.”
  • Subjects are able to control a one-degree of freedom hand prosthesis through online processing of efferent neural signals, and repeatable sensory feedback may be received by stimulating afferent fibers.

    “These trials showed that subjects are able to control a one-degree of freedom hand prosthesis through online processing of the efferent neural signals, and that repeatable sensory feedback may be received by stimulating afferent fibers [22,23] corresponding to the missing hand/fingers territories.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kemere, C., Santhanam, G., Yu, B. M., Afshar, A., Ryu, S. I., Meng, T. H., & Shenoy, K. V.
Affiliations
Stanford University (US)
Venue
Journal of Neurophysiology
Published
2008-10
Volume
100
Issue
4
Pages
2441-2452
ISSN
  • 0022-3077 (ISSN-L)
  • 1522-1598
OpenAlex
W2165376801
Cited by
157
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 8
FWCI
7.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neurophysiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neural Engineering
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Muscle activation and electromyography studies
Keywords
neural state transitions, hidden Markov models, arm reaching, target detection, neural decoding
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Animals, Cognition, Cues, Electrodes, Implanted, Forearm, Macaca mulatta, Male, Markov Chains, Models, Neurological, Motor Cortex, Space Perception, Stereotyped Behavior, Models, Statistical, Poisson Distribution, 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