A computational model to design wide field-of-view optic nerve neuroprostheses
Open accessAbstract
Neuroprostheses based on retinal stimulation (RS) allows many individuals affected by retinal degeneration to partially restore visual perception but the produced phosphenes are confined into a narrow region of the visual field. Optic nerve stimulation (ONS) has the potential to produce visual perceptions spanning the whole visual field, but its exploitation is challenging since it produces very elongated phosphenes that cannot be easily organized into meaningful percepts. Here, to address this issue, we introduced a geometrical model that allows us to convert firing rate patterns in the retina and optic nerve into visual perceptions and vice versa. Then, we developed and extensively characterized a method to estimate the best perceptions that can be elicited through a given electrode configuration. This method was used to qualitatively compare ONS and RS also using a set of static and dynamic visual scenes through simulated prosthetic vision (SPV) experiments with healthy subjects. Both simulations and SPV experiments showed that it might be possible to reconstruct natural visual scenes using reasonable amounts of active sites, whose arrangement in the optic nerve section exploits purely geometrical factors. The ability of ONS to cover the whole visual field, allowed perception of much more detail in dynamic scenarios than what is possible with RS, where the narrowing of the visual field results in a limited ability to visualize the scene. Our findings suggest that ONS could represent an interesting approach for vision restoration and that our model can be used to optimize it.
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?
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 [28]
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 0 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 2 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 59 · Cited by 2
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- K. He, G. Gkioxari, P. Dollar, and R. Girshick, "Mask R-CNN," presented at the Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision, 2017, pp. 2961-2969. Accessed: Nov. 24, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://openaccess.thecvf.com/content_iccv_2017/html/He_Mask_R- CNN_ICCV_2017_paper.html
- Authors
- Micera, S., Romeni, S., De Luca, D., Pierantoni, L., Toni, L., Marino, G., & Moccia, S.
- Affiliations
- Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna (IT)
- École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (CH)
- Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna
- Corresponding author
- Micera, Silvestro
- ORCID
- Venue
- Research Square
- Published
- 2023-08-07
- OpenAlex
- W4385729019
- Cited by
- 2
- References
- 59
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2024: 1
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- doi.org
- Locations
- Research Square (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
- 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
- optic nerve stimulation, retinal stimulation, neural prostheses, phosphenes, electrode configuration optimization, simulated prosthetic vision, retinal degeneration, vision restoration
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