Can neural implants hotwire damaged brain circuits?

Scientists from North Carolina have developed and implemented a neural implant designed to improve higher-order brain processing- providing hope that one day such implants may be developed to alleviate symptoms of cognitive impairments such as Alzheimer’s.

The brain: the final frontier. Neuroscientists around the world are working painstakingly to uncover the mysteries of the brain and ultimately find ways to reinstate functionality lost through damage or disease. One area of research offering such promise is the field of neural prostheses. At a basic level this work endeavors to repair faulty neural connections by interfacing the brain with computer technology. Significant advances have been made in connecting the human brain with the outside world through sensory and motor prostheses (for example the artificial retina). However, the task of restoring or improving cognitive function has yielded very different problems to those addressed in the development of sensory and motor interfaces.

To restore cognitive function, a neural implant must gather data from one area of the brain, process this information correctly and then deliver the resulting signal to another brain region, bypassing any damaged tissue. This process necessitates an understanding of how different brain regions communicate with each other and how this communication is modified as it travels through the brain in the form of electrochemical impulses. Although this is certainly not an easy task, if successful, this research will have a profound impact on the quality of life throughout society, offering promise for people suffering from a range of disorders including Alzheimer’s, stroke and various other forms of brain trauma and degeneration.

Implant in prefrontal cortex (pink circle): Implant records activity in layers 2/3 and layer 5 (blue) and stimulates in layer 5 (red)

Sam Deadwyler and his team at Wake Forest University School of Medicine in Winston-Salem, North Carolina have recently taken an important step toward making cognitive enhancement via neural prostheses a reality. This group is the first to study the effect of brain implants on decision-making in behaving primates. Their work focused on an area of the brain known to be involved in decision-making; the prefrontal cortex. The structure of this region is well-known and can be separated into a number of layers, each containing different types of brain cell. These cells form connections between layers, passing information through the structure. The team developed an implant which could span a number of these layers. This implant was positioned to record activity simultaneously from both layer2/3 and layer 5 and to deliver custom-designed stimulation to layer 5 cells.

The first task faced by the team was to understand how cellular activity changed when the monkey made either a correct or incorrect decision. To achieve this, the group monitored activity across the implant as the monkeys performed a memory task (choosing a familiar image from a group of unfamiliar images). The team focused on cellular recordings taken just prior to the point when the animals made their choice: the decision period. After observing a number of trials, they found that they could predict how cells would respond to both correct and incorrect decisions. This meant that the scientists were able to ‘decode’ the language of the cells and predict what choice would be made before the animal actually made it!

Now that the group knew what a correct response looked like they were able to write a pretty complicated algorithm to mimic this activity and replay it to cells in layer 5. Amazingly they found that animals stimulated with this artificial activity pattern performed significantly better on the task than animals receiving no stimulation. Indeed, in some of the harder tasks (ones using more images) the animals improved both their speed and accuracy, in some cases improving their average performance by 10-20%. This improvement was also dependent on the stimulation provided. For example an improvement would only be seen if a monkey was provided with a ‘correct’ stimulation pattern calculated from its own data, but not when the experimenters used patterns taken from other animals or arbitrary patterns.

The next question was: if this stimulation could improve performance in normal animals, could it also recover the ability to make correct decisions in animals with specific impairments? This is an important question, since the ultimate medical goal for these implants would be to restore lost functionality. To answer this question the team used a drug that they knew reduces connectivity in the prefrontal cortex and impairs decision-making: cocaine. Monkeys given cocaine performed poorly on the task, being on average 10% worse than their sober counterparts. The team was able to monitor layer 2/3 activity in these animals and judge when an incorrect decision was about to be made, then replace the incorrect activity with their own simulated correct firing pattern. This intervention not only restored normal function but actually raised the cocaine-treated animals performance scores even higher than non-treated animals.

Nope I still don't understand this...

It can’t be denied that from both a technical and medical standpoint, these findings are amazing. However, I believe there are still a number of hurdles to be cleared before we see this technology implemented in patients suffering from cognitive deficits. Many cognitive disorders, such as Alzheimer’s, involve widespread damage incorporating a large number of higher-level processing areas. It is therefore an absolute requirement that we first understand exactly how information is processed in these systems, before we attempt to bypass or repair them. Although this implant certainly improved performance, it relies significantly upon mimicking what is known to be a correct response rather than understanding how the system works. This reminds me of my primary school recorder lessons, where I learned to play by watching where other pupils put their fingers instead of learning to read the sheet music. The end result may be similar, but you can go much further and make fewer mistakes if you fully understand the system! Therefore I think the ‘take home’ message from this study is; we have made some promising progress towards improving cognition through neural implantation, however if we ultimately want to treat widespread neural damage we still need to get a better grip on how these systems function before we move toward treatment.

Post by Sarah Fox

3 thoughts on “Can neural implants hotwire damaged brain circuits?”

  1. Once we speak about building user experience for ‘no shape’ barrières, UX designers will play an essential role.
    They need to incorporate their understanding of natural human functions such as communication, motor unit,
    cognitive, and perceptual skills with machine learning to make
    interfaces that talk with an individual.

    In the recent times, interacting with machines has become user-friendly.

    Moreover, the recent improvements in NUIs
    are making sure that machines can understand human gestures, touch, words, and thoughts in a much better way.
    On the other hand, designing for Natural End user Interfaces is quite challenging as
    designers have to keep below parameters in mind.

    Minority Report like office sounds really cool, but working with
    hands upward for a for a longer time period tire people.
    USER INTERFACE should naturally and perfectly interact with the users without tiring them.

    natural user cadre

    Image Credit rating

    Some signals might not be possible for users with afflictions.
    Therefore you can’t do away with the support for assistive technology like Joysticks or
    electronic aiming devices.

    Fingers and thumbs are your direct link to touchscreen devices.
    Therefore, extrémité should be designed keeping the size of
    touch targets large enough to respond to fat
    hands with adequate room given to not accidently faucet the near by links.

  2. Once making a new kitchen or renovating an existing kitchen, it is highly recommended and a
    good idea to keep an open mind and find out everything possible
    – towards the end of the process, it will definitely pay
    off. Here are some common myths about the design process and its particular results:

    “You can certainly add later” -the best planning is to take
    into account and add all the characteristics of the kitchen at the planning and as well
    as or renewal stages, and not at a later stage. For example, although you may are
    not thinking about putting in a flat screen TV SET in the kitchen space or if you do not currently have a water dispenser, the best
    thing is to make for future installation of these and plan electric powered, communication and water items and keep the alternatives wide open. Also, since the kitchen is supposed to provide us for quite some time, it is
    a good idea to measure all existing ergonomic
    solutions such as drawer drawers, cabinet style dishwashers, and so
    forth Even if you are young and fit at the moment, these additions will prove themselves Mobility
    in the future. Either way, if you prefer to
    deal with kitchen planning in stages – one aspect or specific area at a time – make certain to plan carefully so that everything will fit in stylistic and
    functional harmony when the kitchen will finally be complete.

    ” I do not have so many things” – whether we like it or not, your kitchen has substantial potential for ruining due to multitude of items kept
    in it, which is why space is plenty to store, This means that there is a relative shortage of overhead storage units, so it is important to balance
    function and style.

    “Bigger Better” – Your kitchen space is large and you need a huge kitchen,
    but then you will find yourself going back and out from one machine to another, in addition to this
    situation, preferably in the look stages, consider
    adding a job sink beside the refrigerator or Reduce the need to cross these distances, and there is without a doubt that these enhancements mean additional costs, and if your budget is limited, it is obviously
    worthy of considering a compact kitchen.

    “I do not desire a designer ” -not every kitchen design project requires a designer, but many people need someone to help us see the overall picture and watch over the work.
    Renting consult with an architect or designer does involve quite a lot of cost, but in the long run it is all about keeping money and time.
    In case you have a very clear picture of what you want, do not save the
    expense of a designer as it can best fulfill ideal. Proper and
    efficient planning of your kitchen and coordination between all the different professionals engaged in building your kitchen by a designer can keep your project
    within the some budget, save you unnecessary money and needless problems and particularly keep your sanity.

Comments are closed.

Share This