Classification of TMS evoked potentials using ERP time signatures and SVM versus deep learning

Modeling transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) evoked potentials (TEP) begins with classification of stereotypical single-pulse TMS responses in order to select validation targets for generative dynamical models. Several dimensionality reduction techniques are commonly in use to extract statistically independent features from experimental data for regression against model parameters. Here, we first designed a 3-dimensional feature space based on commonly described event-related potentials (ERP) from the literature. We then compared classification schemes which take as inputs either the 3D projection space or the original full rank input space. Their ability to discriminate TEP recorded from different brain regions given a stimulus site were evaluated. We show that a deep learning architecture, employing Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) and Multi-Layer Perceptron (MLP), yields better accuracy than the 3D projection and raw TEP input combined with Support Vector Machines. Such supervised feature extraction models may therefore be useful for scoring neural circuit simulations based on their ability to reproduce the underlying dynamical processes responsible for differential TEP responses.

[1]  Andreas Spiegler,et al.  Selective Activation of Resting-State Networks following Focal Stimulation in a Connectome-Based Network Model of the Human Brain , 2016, eNeuro.

[2]  V. Sinha,et al.  Event-related potential: An overview , 2009, Industrial psychiatry journal.

[3]  C. Miniussi,et al.  New insights into rhythmic brain activity from TMS–EEG studies , 2009, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[4]  Ulf Ziemann,et al.  TMS-EEG Signatures of GABAergic Neurotransmission in the Human Cortex , 2014, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[5]  Jimmy Ba,et al.  Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimization , 2014, ICLR.

[6]  Wei Wu,et al.  ARTIST: A fully automated artifact rejection algorithm for single‐pulse TMS‐EEG data , 2018, Human brain mapping.

[7]  Mauro Ursino,et al.  A neural mass model of interconnected regions simulates rhythm propagation observed via TMS-EEG , 2011, NeuroImage.

[8]  G. Glover,et al.  Causal interactions between fronto-parietal central executive and default-mode networks in humans , 2013, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[9]  A. Etkin,et al.  Test-retest reliability of transcranial magnetic stimulation EEG evoked potentials , 2017, Brain Stimulation.

[10]  Sean L. Hill,et al.  Modeling the effects of transcranial magnetic stimulation on cortical circuits. , 2005, Journal of neurophysiology.

[11]  C. Miniussi,et al.  Transcranial magnetic stimulation and cortical evoked potentials: A TMS/EEG co-registration study , 2006, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[12]  Paolo Remagnino,et al.  How deep learning extracts and learns leaf features for plant classification , 2017, Pattern Recognit..

[13]  Hinrich Schütze,et al.  Introduction to information retrieval , 2008 .

[14]  Jochen Triesch,et al.  A Model of TMS-induced I-waves in Motor Cortex , 2014, Brain Stimulation.