Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Neurally Driven Prosthetics
Neurally Driven Prosthetics
Neurally Driven Prosthetics
Neurally Driven Prosthetics
Neurally Driven Prosthetics
Neurally Driven Prosthetics
Neurally Driven Prosthetics
Neurally Driven Prosthetics
Neurally Driven Prosthetics
Neurally Driven Prosthetics
Neurally Driven Prosthetics
Neurally Driven Prosthetics
Neurally Driven Prosthetics
Neurally Driven Prosthetics
Neurally Driven Prosthetics
Neurally Driven Prosthetics
Neurally Driven Prosthetics
Neurally Driven Prosthetics
Neurally Driven Prosthetics
Neurally Driven Prosthetics
Neurally Driven Prosthetics
Neurally Driven Prosthetics
Neurally Driven Prosthetics
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Neurally Driven Prosthetics


Published on

final presentation for capstone neuroscience class

final presentation for capstone neuroscience class

Published in: Business
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

No notes for slide


  • 1. Neurally Driven Prosthetics: Pt. II
    Study: (Schwartz, et. Al: primate control of robotic arm)
  • 2. Signal is derived from M1
    Primary motor cortex produces stereotyped neuron ensemble firing patterns during a particular action
    Strong neural activity-behavior coupling in this area, ideal for a decoding algorithm
    Ensemble firing patterns are vectorial, and encoded by firing rate.
  • 3. Cortical ensemble activity and behavioral pairing is strong
    This allows engineers to be confident about designing a patterned output from a neural signal
    Figure shows the high predictability of a neuron’s activity with behavior—machine canpredict accurately what the monkey’s arm would do.
  • 4. Macaque Brain
  • 5. Other motor association cortices
    Occur in parallel processing networks, and work in concert to initiate, guide/modify, and extinguish movements.
    These include: supplementary motor cortex (fine/complex movements), cerebellum (coordination/error suppression), basalganglia (initiation/extinction) and possibly parietal association cortices involved in internal representations that govern hand manipulation/grasping.
  • 6. The interface
    Researchers found that microelectrode arrays in the 10’s are sufficient as a signal source
    Most probably 100’s are needed to accommodate full repertoire of limb movements.
  • 7. Interface is closed-loop
    Once the microelectrode array is implanted, it cannot be modified-closed system.
    Manipulation of robot arm is real-time, sampling neuronal recordings once every 30 msec
    Time delay for arm movement is ~150 msec, comparable to the delay seen in a biological arm.
    Visual feedback substitutes for sensory feedback, allowing increased accuracy/agility through learning.
  • 8. Predicted vs. Actual
  • 9. A little computation (don’t be scared..)
    A mathematical algorithm is used to turn electrical signal patterns from the electrodes into a meaningful set of commands for the robotic arm.
    • It is a linear and integrative function.
    • 10. Population Vector Algorithm is used (PVA).
  • PVA (Population Vector Algorithm)
    “relies on the directional tuning of each unit, characterized by a single preferred direction in which the unit fires maximally. The real-time population vector is essentially a vector sum of the preferred directions of the units in the recorded population, weighted by the instantaneous firing rates of the units” –(Schwartz, et. Al)
  • 11. Visualizing PVA
    Neuronal assembly assignment: Upon movement of the arm in one of 8 directions, excitability of that neuron determines calibration in that direction. Tuning!
  • 12. Inverse Kinematics
    An additional algorithm is needed to calculate proper joint positioning.
    Since there is such a large number of possible limb positionings (shoulder flexion/extension, adduction/abduction, rotation, and elbow flexion/extension), to avoid computational overload, an algorithm computes the most probable joint positioning using inverse kinematics equations.
  • 13. Inverse Kinematics
    To produce such an output for an inverse kinematics equation, only starting and ending points are needed.
    Endpoint in 3D space is calculated before being fed to the algorithm real-time by integrating the endpoint velocity to endpoint position, which is then converted to a joint-angle command to the robot.
  • 14. Kinematic Data
  • 15. Kinematic Data
  • 16. Movement Quality
    Different colors represent 4 different targets.
    Thin grey lines represent the average over all trials
    Space-filling shapes represent the standard deviation
    Grey balls represent areas where assistance was provided.
  • 17. Misc. Methodology
    It takes about 1,000 trials over a period of 1-2 weeks before high accuracy (80-100%) is achieved.
    A training period was necessary, where small automated velocity vectors were added (in the direction of interest) for a handicap
    Kinematics of arm control mirrors bell-shaped profile of a natural arm, but much slower (3-5 sec robotic vs. 1-2 sec biological)
  • 18. Hurdles
    Engineering: long-term, stable electrodes must be developed if this technology is to be used for prostheses.
    Sizable array of immobile recording, computer and robotic control hardware must be sized down.
    Not autonomic--trained specialist is needed to supervise.
    Neuroscientific: feedback is purely visual (clumsiness during training is typical for visual-only guidance); for optimal interaction with a physical environment, sensory ganglion, mainly pressure sensors, are needed.
    Velliste, et. Al. recorded from the primary motor cortex; but as mentioned before, many areas in the brain with unique properties produce signals which may be useful in guiding a prosthetic device.
  • 19. Areas of great promise
    Patients of paralysis or locked-in syndrome could feasibly interact with their environment again.
    Opens up and makes feasible the field of Brain/Machine Interfaces (BMI’s) moving beyond the field of prostheses. Theoretically, as long as neural activity and behavior are coupled stereotypically, we can understand how the information is encoded. BMI engineers can decode it and feed the signal to a computer algorithm which produces an output.
  • 20. So maybe one day, we’ll finally say BUH-BYE to this…
  • 21. And Hello to this…
    Other applications:
    -Biomimetics (retinal and cochlear implants)
    -Neural signal feedback therapy
    -Gaming control
  • 22. But more likely this.
  • 23. Sources
    Alexander GE, Crutcher MD. Neural representations of the target (goal) of visually guided arm movements in three motor areas of the monkey. J Neurophysiol. 1990 Jul;64(1):164-78.
    Carmena JM, Lebedev MA, Crist RE, O'Doherty JE, Santucci DM, Dimitrov DF, Patil PG, Henriquez CS, Nicolelis MA. Learning to control a brain-machine interface for reaching and grasping by
    primates. PLoSBiol. 2003 Nov;1(2):E42. Epub 2003 Oct 13.
    Chapin JK, Moxon KA, Markowitz RS, Nicolelis MA. Real-time control of a robot arm using simultaneously recorded neurons in the motor cortex.
    Nat Neurosci. 1999 Jul;2(7):664-70.
    CrutcherMD, Russo GS, Ye S, Backus DA. Target-, limb-, and context-dependent neural activity in the cingulate and supplementary motor areas of the monkey. Exp Brain Res. 2004 Oct;158(3):278-88. Epub 2004 Jul 29.
    Dornay M, Sanger TD. Equilibrium point control of a monkey arm simulator by a fast learning tree structured artificial neural network.
    BiolCybern. 1993;68(6):499-508.
    Helms Tillery SI, Taylor DM, Schwartz AB. Training in cortical control of neuroprosthetic devices improves signal extraction from small neuronal ensembles. Rev Neurosci. 2003;14(1-2):107-19.
    Liu X, Robertson E, Miall RC. Neuronal activity related to the visual representation of arm movements in thelateralcerebellarcortex.JNeurophysiol. 2003 Mar;89(3):1223-37. Epub 2002 Nov 20.
    Serruya M, Hatsopoulos N, Fellows M, Paninski L, Donoghue J. Robustness of neuroprosthetic decoding algorithms. BiolCybern. 2003 Mar;88(3):219-28.
    Taylor DM, Tillery SI, Schwartz AB. Information conveyed through brain-control: cursor versus robot. IEEE Trans Neural SystRehabil Eng. 2003 Jun;11(2):195-9.
    Tillery SI, Taylor DM. Signal acquisition and analysis for cortical control of neuroprosthetics. CurrOpinNeurobiol. 2004 Dec;14(6):758-62. Review.
    VellisteM, Perel S, Spalding MC, Whitford AS, Schwartz AB. Cortical control of a prosthetic arm for self-feeding. Nature. 2008 May 28.
    Wahnoun R, He J, Helms Tillery SI. Selection and parameterization of cortical neurons for neuroprosthetic control. J Neural Eng. 2006 Jun;3(2):162-71. Epub 2006 May 16.
    Wessberg J, Nicolelis MA. Optimizing a linear algorithm for real-time robotic control using chronic cortical ensemble recordings in monkeys.
    J CognNeurosci. 2004 Jul-Aug;16(6):1022-35.
    Wessberg J, Stambaugh CR, Kralik JD, Beck PD, Laubach M, Chapin JK, Kim J, Biggs SJ, Srinivasan MA, Nicolelis MA. Real-time prediction of hand trajectory by ensembles of cortical neurons in primates. Nature. 2000 Nov 16;408(6810):361-5.
    Electrode figure:
    Inverse kinematics figure:
    BMI figure:
    Terminator figure:
    Macaque brain figure:
    Keyboard figure:
    “Predicted vs. Actual “kinematic trajectory figure: Wessberg, et. Al.
    All other figures are from Velliste, et. Al.