Computer Simulation
Research Papers
Extracting information from the shape and spatial distribution of evoked potentials
BACKGROUND: Over 90 years after its first recording, scalp electroencephalography (EEG) remains one of the most widely used techniques in human neuroscience research, in particular for the study of event-related potentials (ERPs). However, because of its low signal-to-noise ratio, extracting useful information from these signals continues to be a hard-technical challenge. Many studies focus on simple properties of the ERPs such as peaks, latencies, and slopes of signal deflections. NEW METHOD: To overcome these limitations, we developed the Wavelet-Information method which uses wavelet decomposition, information theory, and a quantification based on single-trial decoding performance to extract information from evoked responses. RESULTS: Using simulations and real data from four experiments, we show that the proposed approach outperforms standard supervised analyses based on peak amplitude estimation. Moreover, the method can extract information using the raw data from all recorded channels using no a priori knowledge or pre-processing steps. COMPARISON WITH EXISTING METHOD(S): We show that traditional approaches often disregard important features of the signal such as the shape of EEG waveforms. Also, other approaches often require some form of a priori knowledge for feature selection and lead to problems of multiple comparisons. CONCLUSIONS: This approach offers a new and complementary framework to design experiments that go beyond the traditional analyses of ERPs. Potentially, it allows a wide usage beyond basic research; such as for clinical diagnosis, brain-machine interfaces, and neurofeedback applications requiring single-trial analyses.
View Full Paper →Swing-leg trajectory of running guinea fowl suggests task-level priority of force regulation rather than disturbance rejection
To achieve robust and stable legged locomotion in uneven terrain, animals must effectively coordinate limb swing and stance phases, which involve distinct yet coupled dynamics. Recent theoretical studies have highlighted the critical influence of swing-leg trajectory on stability, disturbance rejection, leg loading and economy of walking and running. Yet, simulations suggest that not all these factors can be simultaneously optimized. A potential trade-off arises between the optimal swing-leg trajectory for disturbance rejection (to maintain steady gait) versus regulation of leg loading (for injury avoidance and economy). Here we investigate how running guinea fowl manage this potential trade-off by comparing experimental data to predictions of hypothesis-based simulations of running over a terrain drop perturbation. We use a simple model to predict swing-leg trajectory and running dynamics. In simulations, we generate optimized swing-leg trajectories based upon specific hypotheses for task-level control priorities. We optimized swing trajectories to achieve i) constant peak force, ii) constant axial impulse, or iii) perfect disturbance rejection (steady gait) in the stance following a terrain drop. We compare simulation predictions to experimental data on guinea fowl running over a visible step down. Swing and stance dynamics of running guinea fowl closely match simulations optimized to regulate leg loading (priorities i and ii), and do not match the simulations optimized for disturbance rejection (priority iii). The simulations reinforce previous findings that swing-leg trajectory targeting disturbance rejection demands large increases in stance leg force following a terrain drop. Guinea fowl negotiate a downward step using unsteady dynamics with forward acceleration, and recover to steady gait in subsequent steps. Our results suggest that guinea fowl use swing-leg trajectory consistent with priority for load regulation, and not for steadiness of gait. Swing-leg trajectory optimized for load regulation may facilitate economy and injury avoidance in uneven terrain.
View Full Paper →Ready to Optimize Your Brain?
Schedule a free consultation to discuss computer simulation and how neurofeedback training can help
Or call us directly at 855-88-BRAIN
View Programs & Pricing →