A brain-machine interface instructed by direct intracortical microstimulation Joseph E. O’Doherty, Mikhail A. Lebedev, Timothy L. Hanson, Nathan A. Fitzsimmons and Miguel A. L. Nicolelis 1

Key points (abstract) Brain–machine interfaces (BMIs) establish direct communication between the brain and artificial actuators. Future BMIs must also provide a means for delivering sensory signals from the actuators back to the brain. In this study, a direct BMI have been achieved by simultaneously multichannel recording from M1 and stimulating S1. 2

Materials and Methods 3

Animal preparation Subjects: 2 adult male rhesus macaque monkeys (6.7kg and 6.5kg). Cortical Implants: – 6 microelectrode arrays (32 microwires in each) in M1, S1 and Premotor cortex (PMd) in Monkey1; – 4 arrays in M1, PMd, Pariental cortex (PP), supplementary motor area (SMA) in Monkey2. 4

Behavioral Tasks Three behavioral tasks were employed: 1. Center-out, 2. Continuous target pursuit and 3. Target choice task 5

Neural signal processing Linear Discriminant Analysis (LDA): 50ms bins. The neuronal firing rate for each of the neurons in the ensemble was placed into a vector for each time-bin. Prediction Algorithm: Cursor position was reconstructed using multiple Wiener filter linear decoding algorithms applied to the population of recorded Neurons. 6

Result (Average prediction accuracy) HC: Hand Control BCWH: Brain Control With Hand movements BCWOH: Brain Control Without Hand movements R: Average correlation coefficient between actual and predicted value 7

Findings The correspondence between the actual and predicted hand position decreased in sessions BCWH (Wilcoxon signed-rank test). The R for X-position decreased 28.1% and 17.2% in Monkey 2. The R for Y- position decreased 16.7% and 15.6% in Monkeys 1 and 2, respectively. This decrease indicates that the neuronal ensemble adapted to controlling the cursor movements and became less representative of the animal’s hand movements (repeating previous findings of Lebedev et al., 2005; Tkach et al., 2007) 8

BMI with Somatosensory input 9

10

11

Conclusion In the BMI with somatosensory input, one monkey controlled cursor movements directly by using motor cortical activity while receiving somatosensory instructive signals (ICMS) in S1. The second monkey also controlled the cursor using motor cortical activity but, since PP ICMS was ineffective, received somatosensory signals via vibrotactile stimulation of the hand. Therefore, it is conceivable that PP cannot be used for this type of sensory instruction or that use of PP may require much longer training or require different parameters. Stimulation of primary sensory areas of the cortex (and possibly thalamus) appears to be most effective for sensory substitution in BMI. 12

Thank you for your kind attention. 13