4.7 Article

Simultaneous Neural Control of Simple Reaching and Grasping With the Modular Prosthetic Limb Using Intracranial EEG

出版社

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/TNSRE.2013.2286955

关键词

Brain-machine interface (BMI); electrocorticography; functional mapping; high gamma; upper limb prosthesis

资金

  1. National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke [3R01NS0405956-09S1]
  2. DARPA [19GM-1088724, N66001-10-C-4056]
  3. National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering [5T32EB003383-08]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Intracranial electroencephalographic (iEEG) signals from two human subjects were used to achieve simultaneous neural control of reaching and grasping movements with the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Lab (JHU/APL) Modular Prosthetic Limb (MPL), a dexterous robotic prosthetic arm. We performed functional mapping of high gamma activity while the subject made reaching and grasping movements to identify task-selective electrodes. Independent, online control of reaching and grasping was then achieved using high gamma activity from a small subset of electrodes with a model trained on short blocks of reaching and grasping with no further adaptation. Classification accuracy did not decline (p < 0.05, one-way ANOVA) over three blocks of testing in either subject. Mean classification accuracy during independently executed overt reach and grasp movements for (Subject 1, Subject 2) were (0.85, 0.81) and (0.80, 0.96), respectively, and during simultaneous execution they were (0.83, 0.88) and (0.58, 0.88), respectively. Our models leveraged knowledge of the subject's individual functional neuroanatomy for reaching and grasping movements, allowing rapid acquisition of control in a time-sensitive clinical setting. We demonstrate the potential feasibility of verifying functionally meaningful iEEG-based control of the MPL prior to chronic implantation, during which additional capabilities of the MPL might be exploited with further training.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据