Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 9 minor 39 references

Multi-View Broad Learning System for Primate Oculomotor Decision Decoding

T0 review · 3 major / 9 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Treating local field potentials and spikes as two views of the same medial frontal signal and fusing them through a multi-view broad learning system decodes monkey oculomotor decisions more accurately than single-modality and…

desk verdict Plausible incremental ML extension—MvBLS combines per-view feature nodes—but the significance tests are under-specified and the decoding window includes the saccade. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.06180 v3 pith:DKEBYY55 submitted 2019-08-16 q-bio.NC cs.AIcs.LG

Zhenhua Shi , Xiaomo Chen , Changming Zhao , He He , Veit Stuphorn , Dongrui Wu This is my paper · ORCID
classification q-bio.NCcs.AIcs.LG
keywords broadlearningsystemmulti-viewlocalfieldpotentialsspikesoculomotordecisiondecodingmedialfrontalcortexbrain-machineinterfacemulti-classclassification
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper extends the broad learning system, a wide single-layer neural network, to handle two views of the same neural signal at once, and tests it on recordings from the medial frontal cortex of two macaques performing an oculomotor gambling task. The two views are local field potentials (LFPs) and action potentials (spikes), recorded simultaneously from the same electrodes. The paper's central assertion is that these two signal types carry complementary information about the monkey's upcoming choice, and that a multi-view BLS can exploit that complementarity better than single-view classifiers or multi-view subspace methods. The reported 45-session mean four-class accuracy is 47.94%, above the best baseline of 46.51%, with the pairwise differences reported as statistically significant.

What carries the argument

The central object is the multi-view broad learning system (MvBLS), a wide neural network that replaces deep stacking with broad feature construction. Each view is passed through its own set of sparse, de-noised linear feature nodes built by random projection followed by L1-regularized reconstruction; the two views' feature nodes are concatenated, mapped through randomly weighted orthonormal bases and a sigmoid to form enhancement nodes, and the whole is connected to a one-hot label matrix by ridge regression. The paper's argument is that keeping the two views separate in the first layer, rather than concatenating raw features before feature extraction, preserves each signal's specific structure and lets the output layer fuse them effectively, and that this yields better accuracy than subspace-alignment multi-view methods such as MvDA and MvMDA.

What would settle it

Run the same 4-class comparison on epochs that end before the earliest saccade, e.g. 0-90 ms after target onset, or on saccade-aligned windows ending at saccade onset. If MvBLS no longer beats the best single-view baseline there, the claim that it decodes the oculomotor decision and that LFPs and spikes are complementary for that decision would fail.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is a fusion architecture plus an empirical result: building separate sparse feature-node banks for the LFP view and the spike view, then feeding their concatenation into shared nonlinear enhancement nodes and a ridge-regression output layer, decodes the direction of a monkey's saccadic choice better than any of the six compared approaches. The gain appears in both four-way decoding and binary choice decoding, and it holds across most of the 45 sessions. The paper also reports that combined LFP+spike features outperform either modality alone under every classifier tested, which it reads as evidence that the two signals encode complementary aspects of the oculomotor decision.

Load-bearing premise

The central claim assumes that the 400-millisecond decoding window after target onset measures the monkey's choice intention rather than the executed eye movement itself, because the monkeys' reaction times are 100-300 milliseconds and the window therefore includes the saccade.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Fusing LFP and spike features improves oculomotor decision decoding over either modality alone in most of the 45 sessions, for every classifier tested.
  • MvBLS outperforms six classical and state-of-the-art single- and multi-view baselines with statistically significant pairwise differences in four-class decoding.
  • MvBLS is faster than deep multi-view alternatives, making online or high-throughput neural decoding feasible.
  • The architecture is insensitive to its structural parameters, so practitioners can choose small networks for speed without losing accuracy.
  • The paper expects the approach to transfer to other primate brain-state decoding tasks and beyond, since the two-view construction is not specific to oculomotor signals.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A testable next step the authors do not run is to restrict the decoding epoch to the pre-saccade interval; if the accuracy gap persists there, the 'decision' reading is strengthened, and if it collapses, the decoder may be reading the executed saccade instead.
  • Because the LFP and spike feature banks are built independently, the same MvBLS could be applied to other paired neural or physiological streams, such as ECoG with spikes or EEG with eye tracking, without changing the architecture.
  • The reported robustness to parameter choices suggests that cross-validation cost could be reduced in future applications by fixing the structural parameters and tuning only the ridge regularization, though the paper does not claim this.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 9 minor

Summary. The paper extends the Broad Learning System (BLS) to a multi-view setting (MvBLS) by constructing feature nodes for each view separately, concatenating them to form enhancement nodes, and then jointly regressing to the label matrix. The method is applied to decode four oculomotor choice directions from LFPs and spikes recorded in the medial frontal cortex of two macaque monkeys over 45 sessions. The authors report that MvBLS achieves higher average accuracy than SVM, ridge regression, BLS, MvDA, and MvMDA, and that combining LFPs and spikes improves over either modality alone, which they interpret as evidence for complementary decision information. They also report parameter sensitivity, runtime comparisons, and additional experiments with single-unit versus multi-unit spikes.

Significance. If the empirical claims are reliable, the paper contributes a simple multi-view extension of BLS that is computationally efficient and performs well on a challenging neural decoding task. The evaluation is extensive, covering 45 sessions, 30 random partitions per session, multiple single-view and multi-view baselines, binary and four-class decoding, single-unit versus multi-unit comparisons, and runtime benchmarks. Notable strengths include the explicit use of non-parametric multiple-comparison tests, the session-level counts of improvement, and the parameter sensitivity analysis. However, the statistical analysis and the temporal definition of the decoding window need to be corrected before the central claims can be accepted.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section III-E and Table IV] The significance tests appear to treat the 30 random partitions per session as independent samples. Dunn's procedure is applied to 'cross-validation accuracies,' but all partitions of a session reuse the same trials, so the 30 accuracies per session are strongly correlated. The manuscript never states whether the test input consisted of 30×45 = 1350 per-algorithm accuracies, 45 session-mean accuracies, or 30 session-averaged accuracies; the description in Section III-E that Table II standard deviations were 'computed from 30 average accuracies of the 45 sessions' suggests the latter, which would drastically change the p-values in Table IV. As reported, p-values such as MvBLS versus Ridge = 0.0019 cannot be taken at face value. The authors must re-run the comparisons using a valid blocked or repeated-measures test (e.g., Friedman test on session-level accuracies with post-hoc paired comparisons), state the exact test unit, and justify the independence assumption.
  2. [Section III-C and III-G] The decoding window [0,400) ms after target onset includes the saccade, because reaction times are 100–300 ms. The neural features therefore contain movement-execution and post-saccadic feedback activity. The claim of decoding 'oculomotor decision' or 'choice intention' is not uniquely supported, since the classifiers may be decoding the direction of the executed saccade. This confound also weakens the complementary-information interpretation in Section III-G, as the improvement from combining LFPs and spikes could reflect complementary motor-related signals. The authors should provide control analyses, for example time-resolved decoding restricted to pre-saccadic windows or a window ending before the minimum reaction time, to show that the accuracy advantage of MvBLS and the multimodal gain are present before movement onset.
  3. [Section IV-B and Table VI] The claim that 'combining LFP and spike features always improved the decoding performance' is made without any significance test, and the table itself shows the same LFP condition with three slightly different mean accuracies (40.57±0.70, 40.61±0.60, 40.41±0.61), which the text attributes to different train/validation/test partitions. This means the conditions are not matched on identical partitions, so the pairwise differences between conditions could be partly due to partition variability. The authors should use the same random partitions across all conditions and perform paired statistical tests before asserting that fusion 'always' improves decoding.
minor comments (9)
  1. [Section III-E] The sentence 'rejected if p ≥ α/2' is presumably a typo; with an FDR-corrected Dunn's test one rejects when the adjusted p-value is below α. Please correct.
  2. [Section III-B] The word 'preforming' should be 'performing'.
  3. [Table VI] Table VI duplicates the first three rows of Table II for the LFPs, Spikes, and LFPs+Spikes conditions; consider removing the duplication and referencing Table II to avoid confusion.
  4. [Section III-E] The description of how the standard deviations in Table II were computed is ambiguous; please clarify whether the 30 averages are across sessions per partition or across partitions per session.
  5. [Section IV-G] The statement that most prior studies using combined LFPs and spikes 'have not shown significant improvements' is a strong generalization that would benefit from a systematic comparison or a quantitative summary.
  6. [Section IV-E] The DCCAE comparison used modified hyperparameters and only eight runs per session; this weaker comparison should be described as preliminary.
  7. [Figure 9(b)] The criterion for selecting the 10 displayed datasets is not stated; please specify how they were chosen.
  8. [General] The paper does not report a per-monkey breakdown; because the two monkeys contributed unequal numbers of sessions (33 vs. 12), the authors should confirm that the main results hold within each monkey.
  9. [General] The manuscript does not provide code or data; for a paper whose main contribution is an empirical decoding comparison, a reproducibility statement or a link to an implementation would be valuable.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity; the MvBLS performance claims are empirical held-out comparisons.

full rationale

The paper's central claims are that MvBLS improves oculomotor decision decoding and that LFPs and spikes carry complementary information. Both claims are supported by classification accuracies computed on held-out test partitions: 60% training, 20% validation, and 20% test, repeated 30 times on each of 45 sessions. Model parameters are selected via nested cross-validation on training/validation data, and the reported accuracies are test-set accuracies, so no prediction is derived from a fitted constant or from the test labels. The complementary-information conclusion is drawn from across-classifier comparisons of these held-out accuracies, not from an equation that defines one result in terms of another. The dataset is from the authors' prior work [9], but it is measured experimental data rather than a theorem invoked to force the conclusion, and the BLS baseline is an externally published algorithm used as a comparison method. The skeptical concern about non-independent repeated random partitions affecting the Dunn test p-values is a statistical validity issue, not a circularity issue. No self-definitional, fitted-as-prediction, self-citation-load-bearing, or renaming pattern is present, so the appropriate finding is no significant circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim is an empirical performance comparison, not a derivation from first principles. The main selected quantities are model hyperparameters tuned by validation, which is standard. The most consequential assumption is temporal: the 0-400 ms decoding window extends past the saccade on many trials, so the signals may reflect the movement rather than the decision. The statistical tests also assume that 30 random re-partitions of the same data are independent, which is not strictly true.

free parameters (1)
  • MvBLS hyperparameters (n, m, k, s, lambda1, lambda2) = n=15, m=15, k=300, s=0.8, lambda1=0.001, lambda2=1 as defaults; selected from ranges by nested cross-validation
    Model capacity and regularization settings are selected on the validation split; they affect test accuracy but are standard machine learning choices, not theoretical predictions.
assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption The 0-400 ms post-target window contains signals that represent the oculomotor decision rather than the executed saccade or its feedback.
    Reaction times are 100-300 ms, so the epoch extends past saccade onset on many trials. If the window is dominated by the motor act, decision decoding overstates cognitive decoding.
  • domain assumption The 30 random train/validation/test partitions per session are treated as independent samples for statistical testing.
    Same trials are reused across partitions, so the effective sample size for p-values is smaller than 45 times 30; this may inflate significance.
  • domain assumption Standard supervised learning assumptions hold: labels are correct, features are stable across sessions, and nested cross-validation selects hyperparameters without test leakage.
    No leakage detection or stability analysis is reported, and the neural data are not public.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Multi-View Broad Learning System for Primate Oculomotor Decision Decoding." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/DKEBYY55

@misc{pith2026190806180,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Multi-View Broad Learning System for Primate Oculomotor Decision Decoding},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/DKEBYY55}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.06180}
}
read the original abstract

Multi-view learning improves the learning performance by utilizing multi-view data: data collected from multiple sources, or feature sets extracted from the same data source. This approach is suitable for primate brain state decoding using cortical neural signals. This is because the complementary components of simultaneously recorded neural signals, local field potentials (LFPs) and action potentials (spikes), can be treated as two views. In this paper, we extended broad learning system (BLS), a recently proposed wide neural network architecture, from single-view learning to multi-view learning, and validated its performance in decoding monkeys' oculomotor decision from medial frontal LFPs and spikes. We demonstrated that medial frontal LFPs and spikes in non-human primate do contain complementary information about the oculomotor decision, and that the proposed multi-view BLS is a more effective approach for decoding the oculomotor decision than several classical and state-of-the-art single-view and multi-view learning approaches.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.06180 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The architecture of a BLS [5]. Diverse linear de-nois [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Architecture of the proposed MvBLS. Diverse linear d [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Sequence of events in the oculomotor gambling task. T [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (10 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The seven visual cues used in the gambling task. The fig [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: A representative recording (a-d) and population spi [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The average accuracies across the 45 sessions are giv [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_7.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: 4-class classification accuracies of different algo [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Boxplots of the 4-class classification accuracies of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: 4-class classification accuracies of permutation te [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: BLS classification (4-class) accuracy versus (a) the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Similarly, we varied m from 10 to 100, k from 50 to 500, s from 0.25 to 2.5, λ1 from 10−5 to 0.1, and λ2 from 0.01 to 100, and show the results in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Two additional configurations of MvBLS. (a) MvBLS2; [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: 4-class classification accuracies of the three diffe [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_12.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

39 extracted references · 39 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    A high performing brain-machine interface driven by low-f requency local field potentials alone and together with spikes,

    S. D. Stavisky, J. C. Kao, P . Nuyujukian, S. I. Ryu, and K. V . Shenoy, “A high performing brain-machine interface driven by low-f requency local field potentials alone and together with spikes,” Journal of Neural Engineering, vol. 12, no. 3, p. 036009, 2015

    work page 2015

  2. [2]

    Multi-task and multi-view learning of user state,

    M. Kandemir, A. V etek, M. G¨ onen, A. Klami, and S. Kaski, “ Multi-task and multi-view learning of user state,” Neurocomputing, vol. 139, pp. 97–106, 2014

    work page 2014

  3. [3]

    Utilising Kronecker decompo sition and tensor-based multi-view learning to predict where people a re looking in images,

    K. Pasupa and S. Szedm´ ak, “Utilising Kronecker decompo sition and tensor-based multi-view learning to predict where people a re looking in images,” Neurocomputing, vol. 248, pp. 80–93, 2017

    work page 2017

  4. [4]

    Multiview classifi cation and dimensionality reduction of scalp and intracranial EEG dat a through tensor factorisation,

    L. Spyrou, S. Kouchaki, and S. Sanei, “Multiview classifi cation and dimensionality reduction of scalp and intracranial EEG dat a through tensor factorisation,” Signal Processing Systems, vol. 90, no. 2, pp. 273– 284, 2018

    work page 2018

  5. [5]

    Broad learning system: An effectiv e and efficient incremental learning system without the need for deep archi tecture,

    C. P . Chen and Z. Liu, “Broad learning system: An effectiv e and efficient incremental learning system without the need for deep archi tecture,” IEEE Trans. on Neural Networks and Learning Systems , vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 10–24, 2018

    work page 2018

  6. [6]

    Multila yer feedforward networks with a nonpolynomial activation func tion can approximate any function,

    M. Leshno, V . Y . Lin, A. Pinkus, and S. Schocken, “Multila yer feedforward networks with a nonpolynomial activation func tion can approximate any function,” Neural Networks , vol. 6, no. 6, pp. 861– 867, 1993

    work page 1993

  7. [7]

    Stochastic choice of basis fun ctions in adaptive function approximation and the functional-link n et,

    B. Igelnik and Y .-H. Pao, “Stochastic choice of basis fun ctions in adaptive function approximation and the functional-link n et,” IEEE Trans. on Neural Networks , vol. 6, no. 6, pp. 1320–1329, 1995

    work page 1995

  8. [8]

    D istributed optimization and statistical learning via the alternating direction method of multipliers,

    S. Boyd, N. Parikh, E. Chu, B. Peleato, and J. Eckstein, “D istributed optimization and statistical learning via the alternating direction method of multipliers,” F oundations and Trends in Machine Learning , vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 1–122, 2010

    work page 2010

Show all 39 references
  1. [9]

    Sequential selection of econom ic good and action in medial frontal cortex of macaques during value -based decisions,

    X. Chen and V . Stuphorn, “Sequential selection of econom ic good and action in medial frontal cortex of macaques during value -based decisions,” Elife, vol. 4, p. e09418, 2015

    2015

  2. [10]

    Inactivation of medial fronta l cortex changes risk preference,

    X. Chen and V . Stuphorn, “Inactivation of medial fronta l cortex changes risk preference,” Current Biology , vol. 28, no. 19, pp. 3114–3122.e4, 2018

    2018

  3. [11]

    A fully automated approach to spike sorting,

    J. E. Chung, J. F. Magland, A. H. Barnett, V . M. Tolosa, A. C. Tooker, K. Y . Lee, K. G. Shah, S. H. Felix, L. M. Frank, and L. F. Greenga rd, “A fully automated approach to spike sorting,” Neuron, vol. 95, no. 6, pp. 1381–1394, 2017

    2017

  4. [12]

    Bayesian decoding using unsorted spikes in the rat hippocampus,

    F. Kloosterman, S. P . Layton, Z. Chen, and M. A. Wilson, “ Bayesian decoding using unsorted spikes in the rat hippocampus,” Journal of Neurophysiology, vol. 111, no. 1, pp. 217–227, 2014

    2014

  5. [13]

    Extracellular spike waveform dissociates four functionally distinct cel l classes in primate cortex,

    C. Trainito, C. von Nicolai, E. K. Miller, and M. Siegel, “Extracellular spike waveform dissociates four functionally distinct cel l classes in primate cortex,” Current Biology, vol. 29, no. 18, pp. 2973–2982, 2019

    2019

  6. [14]

    Multiscale modeling and decoding algorithms for spike-field activity,

    H.-L. Hsieh, Y . T. Wong, B. Pesaran, and M. M. Shanechi, “ Multiscale modeling and decoding algorithms for spike-field activity, ” Journal of Neural Engineering , vol. 16, no. 1, 2019

    2019

  7. [15]

    Solving multiclass lea rning problems via error-correcting output codes,

    T. G. Dietterich and G. Bakiri, “Solving multiclass lea rning problems via error-correcting output codes,” Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, vol. 2, pp. 263–286, 1994

    1994

  8. [16]

    Working set selec tion using second order information for training support vector machi nes,

    R.-E. Fan, P .-H. Chen, and C.-J. Lin, “Working set selec tion using second order information for training support vector machi nes,” Journal of Machine Learning Research , vol. 6, no. Dec, pp. 1889–1918, 2005

    1918

  9. [17]

    Multi-vie w discriminant analysis,

    M. Kan, S. Shan, H. Zhang, S. Lao, and X. Chen, “Multi-vie w discriminant analysis,” IEEE Trans. on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 188–194, 2016

    2016

  10. [18]

    Generaliz ed multi- view embedding for visual recognition and cross-modal retr ieval,

    G. Cao, A. Iosifidis, K. Chen, and M. Gabbouj, “Generaliz ed multi- view embedding for visual recognition and cross-modal retr ieval,” IEEE Trans. on Cybernetics , vol. 48, no. 9, pp. 2542–2555, 2018

    2018

  11. [19]

    Multiple comparisons using rank sums,

    O. Dunn, “Multiple comparisons using rank sums,” Technometrics, vol. 6, pp. 214–252, 1964

    1964

  12. [20]

    Controlling the false di scovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing,

    Y . Benjamini and Y . Hochberg, “Controlling the false di scovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing,” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B (Methodological) , vol. 57, pp. 289– 300, 1995

    1995

  13. [21]

    Quality metri cs to accompany spike sorting of extracellular signals,

    D. N. Hill, S. B. Mehta, and D. Kleinfeld, “Quality metri cs to accompany spike sorting of extracellular signals,” Journal of Neuroscience , vol. 31, no. 24, pp. 8699–8705, 2011

    2011

  14. [22]

    On deep m ulti-view representation learning,

    W. Wang, R. Arora, K. Livescu, and J. A. Bilmes, “On deep m ulti-view representation learning,” in Proc. 32nd Int’l Conf. on Machine Learning , Lille, France, July 2015, pp. 1083–1092

    2015

  15. [23]

    Predictin g measures of motor performance from multiple cortical spike trains,

    D. R. Humphrey, E. Schmidt, and W. Thompson, “Predictin g measures of motor performance from multiple cortical spike trains,” Science, vol. 170, no. 3959, pp. 758–762, 1970

    1970

  16. [24]

    A high-performance brain-computer interface,

    G. Santhanam, S. I. Ryu, B. M. Y u, A. Afshar, and K. V . Shen oy, “A high-performance brain-computer interface,” Nature, vol. 442, no. 7099, pp. 195–198, 2006

    2006

  17. [25]

    Selecting the signals for a brain–machine interface,

    R. A. Andersen, S. Musallam, and B. Pesaran, “Selecting the signals for a brain–machine interface,” Current Opinion in Neurobiology , vol. 14, no. 6, pp. 720–726, 2004

    2004

  18. [26]

    Encoding of movement direction in different fr equency ranges of motor cortical local field potentials,

    J. Rickert, S. C. de Oliveira, E. V aadia, A. Aertsen, S. R otter, and C. Mehring, “Encoding of movement direction in different fr equency ranges of motor cortical local field potentials,” Journal of Neuroscience, vol. 25, no. 39, pp. 8815–8824, 2005

    2005

  19. [27]

    De- coding 3-D reach and grasp kinematics from high-frequency l ocal field potentials in primate primary motor cortex,

    J. Zhuang, W. Truccolo, C. V argas-Irwin, and J. P . Donog hue, “De- coding 3-D reach and grasp kinematics from high-frequency l ocal field potentials in primate primary motor cortex,” IEEE Trans. on Biomedical Engineering, vol. 57, no. 7, pp. 1774–1784, 2010

    2010

  20. [28]

    Re- lationships among low-frequency local field potentials, sp iking activity, and three-dimensional reach and grasp kinematics in primar y motor and ventral premotor cortices,

    A. K. Bansal, C. E. V argas-Irwin, W. Truccolo, and J. P . D onoghue, “Re- lationships among low-frequency local field potentials, sp iking activity, and three-dimensional reach and grasp kinematics in primar y motor and ventral premotor cortices,” Journal of Neurophysiology, v...

    2011

  21. [29]

    Accurate decoding of reaching movements from fiel d potentials in the absence of spikes,

    R. D. Flint, E. W. Lindberg, L. R. Jordan, L. E. Miller, an d M. W. Slutzky, “Accurate decoding of reaching movements from fiel d potentials in the absence of spikes,” Journal of Neural Engineering , vol. 9, no. 4, p. 046006, 2012

    2012

  22. [30]

    Long term, stable brain machine interface performance using local fiel d potentials and multiunit spikes,

    R. D. Flint, Z. A. Wright, M. R. Scheid, and M. W. Slutzky, “Long term, stable brain machine interface performance using local fiel d potentials and multiunit spikes,” Journal of Neural Engineering , vol. 10, no. 5, p. 056005, 2013

    2013

  23. [31]

    Measu rements of simultaneously recorded spiking activity and local field potentials suggest that spatial selection emerges in the frontal eye fie ld,

    I. E. Monosov, J. C. Trageser, and K. G. Thompson, “Measu rements of simultaneously recorded spiking activity and local field potentials suggest that spatial selection emerges in the frontal eye fie ld,” Neuron, vol. 57, no. 4, pp. 614–625, 2008

    2008

  24. [32]

    Low-frequency local field potentials and spikes in primary visual cortex convey independent visu al informa- tion,

    A. Belitski, A. Gretton, C. Magri, Y . Murayama, M. A. Mon temurro, N. K. Logothetis, and S. Panzeri, “Low-frequency local field potentials and spikes in primary visual cortex convey independent visu al informa- tion,” Journal of Neuroscience , vol. 28, no. 22, pp. 5696–5709, 2008. 14

    2008

  25. [33]

    The origin o f extracellular fields and currents – EEG, ECoG, LFP and spikes,

    G. Buzsaki, C. A. Anastassiou, and C. Koch, “The origin o f extracellular fields and currents – EEG, ECoG, LFP and spikes,” Nature Reviews Neuroscience, vol. 13, pp. 407–420, 2012

    2012

  26. [34]

    Dissonant represent ations of visual space in prefrontal cortex during eye movements,

    X. Chen, M. Zirnsak, and T. Moore, “Dissonant represent ations of visual space in prefrontal cortex during eye movements,” Cell Reports, vol. 22, no. 8, pp. 2039–2052, 2018

    2018

  27. [35]

    Modelling and analysis of local field potentials for studying the funct ion of cortical circuits,

    G. T. Einevoll, C. Kayser, N. K. Logothetis, and S. Panze ri, “Modelling and analysis of local field potentials for studying the funct ion of cortical circuits,” Nature Reviews Neuroscience , vol. 14, pp. 770–785, 2013

    2013

  28. [36]

    A method for detection and classification of events in neural activity,

    H. S. Bokil, B. Pesaran, R. A. Andersen, and P . P . Mitra, “ A method for detection and classification of events in neural activity,” IEEE Trans. on Biomedical Engineering , vol. 53, no. 8, pp. 1678–1687, 2006

    2006

  29. [37]

    Reliabil ity of directional information in unsorted spikes and local field p otentials recorded in human motor cortex,

    J. A. Perge, S. Zhang, W. Q. Malik, M. L. Homer, S. Cash, G. Friehs, E. N. Eskandar, J. P . Donoghue, and L. R. Hochberg, “Reliabil ity of directional information in unsorted spikes and local field p otentials recorded in human motor cortex,” Journal of Neural Engineering , vol...

    2014

  30. [38]

    Decoding speech with integrated hybrid signals r ecorded from the human ventral motor cortex,

    K. Ibayashi, N. Kunii, T. Matsuo, Y . Ishishita, S. Shima da, K. Kawai, and N. Saito, “Decoding speech with integrated hybrid signals r ecorded from the human ventral motor cortex,” Frontiers in Neuroscience, vol. 12, p. 221, 2018

    2018

  31. [39]

    Decoding 3D reach and grasp from hybrid signals in motor and premotor cortices: spikes, multiunit activity, and local fi eld potentials,

    A. K. Bansal, W. Truccolo, C. E. V argas-Irwin, and J. P . D onoghue, “Decoding 3D reach and grasp from hybrid signals in motor and premotor cortices: spikes, multiunit activity, and local fi eld potentials,” Journal of Neurophysiology , vol. 107, no. 5, pp. 1337–1355, 2011

    2011

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.