Timm Meyer

Anastasia-Atalanti Mastakouri, Sebastian Weichwald, Ozan Özdenizci et al.

We propose to fuse two currently separate research lines on novel therapies for stroke rehabilitation: brain-computer interface (BCI) training and transcranial electrical stimulation (TES). Specifically, we show that BCI technology can be used to learn personalized decoding models that relate the global configuration of brain rhythms in individual subjects (as measured by EEG) to their motor performance during 3D reaching movements. We demonstrate that our models capture substantial across-subject heterogeneity, and argue that this heterogeneity is a likely cause of limited effect sizes observed in TES for enhancing motor performance. We conclude by discussing how our personalized models can be used to derive optimal TES parameters, e.g., stimulation site and frequency, for individual patients.

Sebastian Weichwald, Timm Meyer, Bernhard Schölkopf et al.

While invasively recorded brain activity is known to provide detailed information on motor commands, it is an open question at what level of detail information about positions of body parts can be decoded from non-invasively acquired signals. In this work it is shown that index finger positions can be differentiated from non-invasive electroencephalographic (EEG) recordings in healthy human subjects. Using a leave-one-subject-out cross-validation procedure, a random forest distinguished different index finger positions on a numerical keyboard above chance-level accuracy. Among the different spectral features investigated, high $β$-power (20-30 Hz) over contralateral sensorimotor cortex carried most information about finger position. Thus, these findings indicate that finger position is in principle decodable from non-invasive features of brain activity that generalize across individuals.

Sebastian Weichwald, Timm Meyer, Ozan Özdenizci et al.

Causal terminology is often introduced in the interpretation of encoding and decoding models trained on neuroimaging data. In this article, we investigate which causal statements are warranted and which ones are not supported by empirical evidence. We argue that the distinction between encoding and decoding models is not sufficient for this purpose: relevant features in encoding and decoding models carry a different meaning in stimulus- and in response-based experimental paradigms. We show that only encoding models in the stimulus-based setting support unambiguous causal interpretations. By combining encoding and decoding models trained on the same data, however, we obtain insights into causal relations beyond those that are implied by each individual model type. We illustrate the empirical relevance of our theoretical findings on EEG data recorded during a visuo-motor learning task.