Abstract
During the last two decades, considerable progress has been made in the studies of brain–computer interfaces (BCIs)—devices in which motor signals from the brain are registered by multi-electrode arrays and transformed into commands for artificial actuators such as cursors and robotic devices. This review is focused on one problem. Voluntary motor control is based on neurophysiological processes, which strongly depend on the afferent innervation of skin, muscles, and joints. Thus, invasive BCI has to be based on a bidirectional system in which motor control signals are registered by multichannel microelectrodes implanted in motor areas, whereas tactile, proprioceptive, and other useful signals are transported back to the brain through spatiotemporal patterns of intracortical microstimulation (ICMS) delivered to sensory areas. In general, the studies of invasive BCIs have advanced in several directions. The progress of BCIs with artificial sensory feedback will not only help patients, but will also expand base knowledge in the field of human cortical functions.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Baranauskas, G., What limits the performance of current invasive brain computer machine interfaces?, Front. Syst. Neurosci., 2014, vol. 8, pp. 68.
Evarts, E.V., Relation of pyramidal tract activity to force exerted during voluntary movement, J. Neurophysiol., 1968, vol. 31, no. 1, p. 14.
Humphrey, D.R., Schmidt, E.M., and Thompson, W.D., Predicting measures of motor performance from multiple cortical spike trains, Science, 1970, vol. 170, no. 3959, p. 758.
Fetz, E.E., Operant conditioning of cortical unit activity, Science, 1969, vol. 163, no. 3870, p. 955.
Georgopoulos, A.P., Schwartz, A.B., and Ketiner, R.E., Neuronal population coding of movement direction, Science, 1986, vol. 233, no. 4771, p. 1416.
Georgopoulos, A.P., Kettner, R.E., and Schwartz, A.B., Primate motor cortex and free arm movements to visual targets in three-dimensional space: II. Coding of the direction of movement by a neuronal population, J. Neurosci., 1988, vol. 8, no. 8, p. 2928.
Chapin, J.K., Moxon, K.A., Markowitz, R.S., and Nicolelis, M.A., Real-time control of a robot arm using simultaneously recorded neurons in the motor cortex, Nat. Neurosci., 1999, vol. 2, no. 7, p. 664.
Carmena, J.M., Lebedev, M.A., Crist, R.E., et al., Learning to control a brain-machine interface for reaching and grasping by primates, PLoS Biol., 2003, vol. 1, no. 2, p. 193.
Musallam, S., Corneil, B.D., Greger, B., et al., Cognitive control signals for neural prosthetics, Science, 2004, vol. 305, no. 5681, p. 258.
Santhanam, G., Ryu, S.I., Yu, B.M., et al., A high-performance brain-computer interface, Nature, 2006, vol. 442, no. 7099, p. 195.
Serruya, M.D., Hatsopoulos, N.G., Paninski, L., et al., Brain-machine interface: instant neural control of a movement signal, Nature, 2002, vol. 416, pp. 141.
Taylor, D.M., Tillery, S.I.H., and Schwartz, A.B., Direct cortical control of 3D neuroprosthetic devices, Science, 2002, vol. 296, no. 5574, p. 1829.
Fallon, J.B., Irvine, D.R.F., and Shepherd, R.K., Neural prostheses and brain plasticity, J. Neural Eng., 2009, vol. 6, no. 6, 065008.
Sedwick, C., Practice makes perfect: Learning mind control of prosthetics, PLoS Biol., 2009, vol. 7, no. 7, e1000152.
Wang, W., Collinger, J.L., Perez, M.A., et al., Neural interface technology for rehabilitation: exploiting and promoting neuroplasticity, Phys. Med. Rehabil. Clin. North Am., 2010, vol. 21, no. 1, p. 157.
Johansson, R.S. and Flanagan, J.R., Coding and use of tactile signals from the fingertips in object manipulation tasks, Nat. Rev. Neurosci., 2009, vol. 10, no. 5, p. 345.
Wheat, H.E., Goodwin, A.W., and Browning, A.S., Tactile resolution: peripheral neural mechanisms underlying the human capacity to determine positions of objects contacting the fingerpad, J. Neurosci., 1975, vol. 15, no. 8, p. 5582.
Jones, L.A. and Smith, A.M., Tactile sensory system: encoding from the periphery to the cortex, Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Syst. Biol. Med., 2014, vol. 6, no. 3, p. 279.
Sainburg, R.L., Ghilardi, M.F., Poizner, H., and Ghez, C., Control of limb dynamics in normal subjects and patients without proprioception, J. Neurophysiol., 1995, vol. 73, no. 2, p. 820.
Shenoy, K.V., Sahani, M., and Churchland, M.M., Cortical control of arm movements: a dynamical systems perspective, Annu. Rev. Neurosci., 2013, vol. 36, pp. 337.
Lebedev, M.A., Tate, A.J., Hanson, T.L., et al., Future developments in brain-machine interface research, Clinics, 2011, vol. 66, no. S1, p. 25.
Bensmaia, S.J. and Miller, L.E., Restoring sensorimotor function through intracortical interfaces: progress and looming challenges, Nat. Rev. Neurosci., 2014, vol. 15, no. 5, p. 313.
Suminski, A.J., Tkach, D.C., Fagg, A.H., and Hatsopoulos, N.G., Incorporating feedback from multiple sensory modalities enhances brain-machine interface control, J. Neurosci., 2010, vol. 30, no. 50, p. 16777.
Gilja, V., Chestek, C.A., Diester, I., et al., Challenges and opportunities for next-generation intracortically based neural prostheses, IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng., 2011, vol. 58, no. 7, p. 1891.
Green, A.M. and Kalaska, J.F., Learning to move machines with the mind, Trends Neurosci., 2011, vol. 34, no. 2, p. 61.
Venkatraman, S. and Carmena, J.M., Active sensing of target location encoded by cortical microstimulation, IEEE Trans. Neural Syst. Rehabil. Eng., 2011, vol. 19, no. 3, p. 317.
Chambers, C.D. and Mattingley, J.B., Neurodisruption of selective attention: insights and implications, Trends Cognit. Sci., 2005, vol. 9, no. 11, p. 542.
Graziano, M.S.A., Taylor, C.S.R., and Moore, T., Complex movements evoked by microstimulation of precentral cortex, Neuron, 2002, vol. 34, pp. 841.
Tehovnik, E.J., Tolias, A.S., Sultan, F., et al., Direct and indirect activation of cortical neurons by electrical microstimulation, J. Neurophysiol., 2006, vol. 96, no. 2, p. 512.
Romo, R., Hernández, A., Zainos, A., and Salinas, E., Somatosensory discrimination based on cortical microstimulation, Nature, 1998, vol. 392, no. 6674, p. 387.
Romo, R., Hernández, A., Zainos, A., et al., Sensing without touching: psychophysical performance based on cortical microstimulation, Neuron, 2000, vol. 26, no. 1, p. 273.
de Lafuente, V. and Romo, R., Neuronal correlates of subjective sensory experience, Nat. Neurosci, 2005, vol. 8, no. 12, p. 1698.
Fitzsimmons, N.A., Drake, W., Hanson, T.L., et al., Primate reaching cued by multichannel spatiotemporal cortical microstimulation, J. Neurosci., 2007, vol. 27, no. 21, p. 5593.
O’Doherty, J.E., Lebedev, M.A., Hanson, T.L., et al., A brain-machine interface instructed by direct intracortical microstimulation, Front. Integr. Neurosci., 2009, vol. 3, no. 20, p. 5.
O’Doherty, J.E., Lebedev, M.A., Ifft, P.J., et al., Active tactile exploration enabled by a brain-machine-brain interface, Nature, 2011, vol. 479, no. 7372, p. 228.
Histed, M.H., Ni, A.M., and Maunsell, J.H.R., Insights into cortical mechanisms of behavior from microstimulation experiments. Conversion of Sensory Signals into Perceptions, Memories and Decisions, Prog. Neurobiol., 2013, vol. 103, pp. 115.
Merrill, D.R., Bikson, M., and Jefferys, J.G.R., Electrical stimulation of excitable tissue: design of efficacious and safe protocols, J. Neurosci. Meth., 2005, vol. 141, no. 2, p. 171.
Joucla, S., Branchereau, P., Cattaert, D., and Yvert, B., Extracellular neural microstimulation may activate much larger regions than expected by simulations: a combined experimental and modeling study, PLoS One, 2012, vol. 7, no. 8, e41324.
Overstreet, C.K., Klein, J.D., and Helms Tillery, S.I., Computational modeling of direct neuronal recruitment during intracortical microstimulation in somatosensory cortex, J. Neural Eng., 2013, vol. 10, no. 6, 066016.
Song, W., Kerr, C.C., Lytton, W.W., and Francis, J.T., Cortical plasticity induced by spike-triggered microstimulation in primate somatosensory cortex, PLoS One, 2013, vol. 8, no. 3, e57453.
Medina, L.E., Lebedev, M.A., O’Doherty, J.E., and Nicolelis, M.A.L., Stochastic facilitation of artificial tactile sensation in primates, J. Neurosci., 2012, vol. 32, no. 41, p. 14271.
Zaaimi, B., Ruiz-Torres, R., Solla, S.A., and Miller, L.E., Multi-electrode stimulation in somatosensory cortex increases probability of detection, J. Neural Eng., 2013, vol. 10, no. 5, 056013.
Weber, D.J., London, B.M., Hokanson, J.A., et al., Limb-state information encoded by peripheral and central somatosensory neurons: implications for an afferent interface, IEEE Trans. Neural Syst. Rehabil. Eng., 2011, vol. 19, no. 5, p. 501.
Kim, S., Callier, T., Tabot, G., et al., Sensitivity to microstimulation of somatosensory cortex distributed over multiple electrodes, Front. Syst. Neurosci., 2015, vol. 9, art. 47.
Taoka, M., Toda, T., and Iwamura, Y., Representation of the midline trunk, bilateral arms, and shoulders in the monkey postcentral somatosensory cortex, Exp. Brain Res., 1998, vol. 123, no. 3, p. 315.
Iwamura, Y., Tanaka, M., Sakamoto, M., and Hikosaka, O., Functional subdivisions representing different finger regions in area 3 of the first somatosensory cortex of the conscious monkey, Exp. Brain Res., 1983, vol. 51, no. 3, p. 315.
Kaas, J.H., The functional organization of somatosensory cortex in primates, Ann. Anat., 1993, vol. 175, no. 6, p. 509.
Krubitzer, L.A. and Kaas, J.H., The organization and connections of somatosensory cortex in marmosets, J. Neurosci., 1990, vol. 10, no. 3, p. 952.
Kaas, J.H., Stepniewska, I., and Gharbawie, O., Cortical networks subserving upper limb movements in primates, Eur. J. Phys. Rehabil. Med., 2012, vol. 48, no. 2, p. 299.
Sur, M., Garraghty, P.E., and Bruce, C.J., Somatosensory cortex in macaque monkeys: laminar differences in receptive field size in areas 3b and I, Brain Res., 1985, vol. 342, no. 2, p. 391.
Reed, J.L., Qi, H.X., Pouget, P., et al., Modular processing in the hand representation of primate primary somatosensory cortex coexists with widespread activation, J. Neurophysiol., 2010, vol. 104, no. 6, p. 3136.
Lipton, M.L., Liszewski, M.C., O’Connell, M.N., et al. Interactions within the hand representation in primary somatosensory cortex of primates, J. Neurosci., 2010, vol. 30, no. 47, p. 15895.
Thakur, P.H., Fitzgerald, P.J., and Hsiao, S.S., Secondorder receptive fields reveal multidigit interactions in area 3b of the macaque monkey, J. Neurophysiol., 2012, vol. 108, pp. 243.
Friedman, R.M., Chen, L.M., and Roe, A.W., Responses of areas 3b and 1 in anesthetized squirrel monkeys to singleand dual-site stimulation of the digits, J. Neurophysiol., 2008, vol. 100, pp. 3185.
Negyessy, L., Palfi, E., Ashaber, M., et al., Intrinsic horizontal connections process global tactile features in the primary somatosensory cortex: neuroanatomical evidence, J. Comp. Neurol., 2013, vol. 521, no. 12, p. 2798.
Andersen, R.A., Kellis, S., Klaes, C., and Aflalo, T., Toward more versatile and intuitive cortical brainmachine interfaces, Curr. Biol., 2014, vol. 24, no. 18, p. R885.
Fagg, A.H., Hatsopoulos, N.G., Lafuente, V., et al., Biomimetic brain machine interfaces for the control of movement, J. Neurosci., 2007, vol. 27, no. 44, p. 11842.
Krubitzer, L., Huffman, K.J., Disbrow, E., and Recanzone, G., Organization of area 3a in macaque monkeys: contributions to the cortical phenotype, J. Comp. Neurol., 2004, vol. 471, no. 1, p. 97.
London, B.M., Jordan, L.R., Jackson, C.R., and Miller, L.E., Electrical stimulation of the proprioceptive cortex (area 3a) used to instruct a behaving monkey, IEEE Trans. Neural Syst. Rehabil. Eng., 2008, vol. 16, no. 1, p. 32.
Dadarlat, M.C., O’Doherty, J.E., and Sabes, P.N., A learning-based approach to artificial sensory feedback: intracortical microstimulation (ICMS) replaces and augments vision, Proc. 6th Int. Conf. IEEE EMBS Neural Eng. Conf., 2013.
Dadarlat, M.C., O’Doherty, J.E., and Sabes, P.N., A learning-based approach to artificial sensory feedback, in Brain-Computer Interface Research, Springer Briefs in Electrical and Computer Engineering, 2014, p. 31.
Makin, J.G. and Sabes, P.N., Sensory integration and density estimation, Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst., 2014, p. 478.
Dadarlat, M.C., O’Doherty, J.E., and Sabes, P.N., A learning-based approach to artificial sensory feedback leads to optimal integration, Nat. Neurosci., 2015, vol. 18, no. 1, p. 138.
Vato, A., Semprini, M., Maggiolini, E., et al., Shaping the dynamics of a bidirectional neural interface, PLoS Comput. Biol., 2012, vol. 8, no. 7, e1002578.
Roschin, V.Y., Frolov, A.A., Burnod, Y., and Maier, M.A., A neural network model for the acquisition of a spatial body scheme through sensory-motor interaction, Neural Comput., 2011, vol. 23, no. 7, p. 1821.
Hatsopoulos, N.G. and Donoghue, J.P., The science of neural interface systems, Annu. Rev. Neurosci., 2009, vol. 32, pp. 249.
Chao, Z.C., Nagasaka, Y., and Fujii, N., Long-term asynchronous decoding of arm motion using electrocorticographic signals in monkeys, Front. Neuroeng., 2010, vol. 3, pp. 3.
Schalk, G., Can electrocorticography (ECoG) support robust and powerful brain-computer interfaces?, Front. Neuroeng., 2010, vol. 3, pp. 9.
Stark, E. and Abeles, M., Predicting movement from multiunit activity, J. Neurosci., 2007, vol. 27, no. 31, p. 8387.
Thelin, J., Jörntell, H., Psouni, E., et al., Implant size and fixation mode strongly influence tissue reactions in the CNS, PLoS One, 2011, vol. 6, no. 1, e16267.
Bansal, A.K., Truccolo, W., Vargas-Irwin, C.E., and Donoghue, J.P., Decoding 3D reach and grasp from hybrid signals in motor and premotor cortices: Spikes, multiunit activity, and local field potentials, J. Neurophysiol., 2012, vol. 107, no. 5, p. 1337.
Bishop, W., Chestek, C.C., Gilja, V., et al., Self-recalibrating classifiers for intracortical brain-computer interface, J. Neural. Eng., 2014, vol. 11, 026001.
Homer, M.L., Perge, J.A., Black, M.J., et al., Adaptive offset correction for intracortical brain-computer interfaces, IEEE Trans. Neural. Syst. Rehabil. Eng., 2014, vol. 22, no. 2, p. 239.
Kao, J.C., Stavisky, S.D., Sussillo, D., et al., Information systems opportunities in brain-machine interface decoders, Proc. IEEE, 2014, vol. 102, no. 5, p. 666.
Li, Z., Decoding methods for neural prostheses: where have we reached?, Front. Syst. Neurosci., 2014, vol. 8, art. 129.
Ward, M.P., Rajdev, P., Ellison, C., and Irazoqui, P.P., Toward a comparison of microelectrodes for acute and chronic recordings, Brain Res., 2009, no. 1282, p. 183.
Cogan, S.F., Neural stimulation and recording electrodes, Annu. Rev. Biomed. Eng., 2008, vol. 10, pp. 275.
Tabot, G.A., Dammann, J.F., Berg, J.A., et al., Restoring the sense of touch with a prosthetic hand through a brain interface, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A., 2013, vol. 110, no. 45, p. 18279.
O’Doherty, J.E., Lebedev, M.A., Li, Z., and Nicolelis, M.A.L., Virtual active touch using randomly patterned intracortical microstimulation, IEEE Trans. Neural Syst. Rehabil. Eng., 2012, vol. 20, no. 1, p. 85.
Jorfi, M., Skousen, J.L., Weder, C., and Capadona, J.R., Progress towards biocompatible intracortical microelectrodes for neural interfacing applications, J. Neural Eng., 2015, vol. 12, no. 1, 011001.
Chen, K.H., Dammann, J.F., Boback, J.L., et al., The effect of chronic intracortical microstimulation on the electrode-tissue interface, J. Neural Eng., 2014, vol. 11, no. 2, 026004.
Walter, A., Murguialday, A.R., Rosenstiel, W., et al., Coupling BCI and cortical stimulation for brain-statedependent stimulation: methods for spectral estimation in the presence of stimulation after-effects, Front. Neural Circuits, 2012, vol. 6, art. 87.
Klaes, C., Shi, Y., Kellis, S., et al., A cognitive neuroprosthetic that uses cortical stimulation for somatosensory feedback, J. Neural Eng., 2014, vol. 11, 056024.
Berg, J.A., Dammann, J.F., Tenore, F.V., et al., Behavioral demonstration of a somatosensory neuroprosthesis, IEEE Trans. Neural. Syst. Rehabil. Eng., 2013, vol. 21, no. 3, p. 500.
Orsborn, A.L. and Carmena, J.M., Creating new functional circuits for action via brain-machine interfaces, Front. Comp. Neurosci., 2013, vol. 7, art. 157.
Kalaska, J.F., From intention to action: motor cortex and the control of reaching movements, Adv. Exp. Med. Biol., 2009, vol. 629, pp. 139.
Ganguly, K. and Carmena, J.M., Emergence of a stable cortical map for neuroprosthetic control, PLoS Biol., 2009, vol. 7, no. 7, e1000153.
Jarosiewicz, B., Chase, S.M., Fraser, G.W., et al., Functional network reorganization during learning in a brain-computer interface paradigm, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A., 2008, vol. 105, no. 49, p. 19486.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Original Russian Text © A.M. Badakva, N.V. Miller, L.N. Zobova, 2016, published in Fiziologiya Cheloveka, 2016, Vol. 42, No. 1, pp. 128–136.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Badakva, A.M., Miller, N.V. & Zobova, L.N. Artificial feedback for invasive brain–computer interfaces. Hum Physiol 42, 111–118 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1134/S0362119716010023
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1134/S0362119716010023