Neurofeedback of two motor functions using supervised learning-based real-time functional magnetic resonance imaging

This study examines the effects of neurofeedback provided by support vector machine (SVM) classification-based real-time functional magnetic resonance imaging (rt-fMRI) during two types of motor tasks. This approach also enables the examination of the neural regions associated with predicting mental states in different domains of motor control, which is critical to further our understanding of normal and impaired function. Healthy volunteers (n = 3D13) performed both a simple button tapping task, and a covert rate-of-speech counting task. The average prediction accuracy was approximately 95% for the button tapping task and 86% for the speech task. However, subsequent offline analysis revealed that classification of the initial runs was significantly lower - 75% (p<0.001) for button and 72% (p<0.005) for speech. To explore this effect, a group analysis was performed using the spatial maps derived from the SVM models, which showed significant differences between the two fMRI runs. One possible explanation for the difference in spatial patterns and the asymmetry in the prediction accuracies is that when subjects are actively engaged in the task (i.e. when they are trying to control a computer interface), they are generating stronger BOLD responses in terms of both intensity and spatial extent.

[1]  J. Krakauer,et al.  Differential cortical and subcortical activations in learning rotations and gains for reaching: a PET study. , 2004, Journal of neurophysiology.

[2]  Gary H. Glover,et al.  Learned regulation of spatially localized brain activation using real-time fMRI , 2004, NeuroImage.

[3]  Stephen C. Strother,et al.  Support vector machines for temporal classification of block design fMRI data , 2005, NeuroImage.

[4]  Leslie G. Ungerleider,et al.  The prefrontal cortex and the executive control of attention , 2008, Experimental Brain Research.

[5]  Frank Schneider,et al.  Real-time fMRI of temporolimbic regions detects amygdala activation during single-trial self-induced sadness , 2003, NeuroImage.

[6]  John D E Gabrieli,et al.  Control over brain activation and pain learned by using real-time functional MRI. , 2005, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[7]  Seung-Schik Yoo,et al.  Functional MRI for neurofeedback: feasibility studyon a hand motor task , 2002, Neuroreport.

[8]  R. Savoy Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) , 2002 .

[9]  Xiaoping P. Hu,et al.  Real‐time fMRI using brain‐state classification , 2007, Human brain mapping.

[10]  Ravi S. Menon,et al.  Learning-related fMRI activation associated with a rotational visuo-motor transformation. , 2005, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[11]  Michael Erb,et al.  Physiological self-regulation of regional brain activity using real-time functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI): methodology and exemplary data , 2003, NeuroImage.

[12]  Hermann Ackermann,et al.  The contribution of the insula to motor aspects of speech production: A review and a hypothesis , 2004, Brain and Language.

[13]  Rainer Goebel,et al.  Combining multivariate voxel selection and support vector machines for mapping and classification of fMRI spatial patterns , 2008, NeuroImage.

[14]  David D. Cox,et al.  Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) “brain reading”: detecting and classifying distributed patterns of fMRI activity in human visual cortex , 2003, NeuroImage.

[15]  L. Cauller Layer I of primary sensory neocortex: where top-down converges upon bottom-up , 1995, Behavioural Brain Research.

[16]  John A. Detre,et al.  Support vector machine learning-based fMRI data group analysis , 2007, NeuroImage.

[17]  R W Cox,et al.  AFNI: software for analysis and visualization of functional magnetic resonance neuroimages. , 1996, Computers and biomedical research, an international journal.