Title | ||
---|---|---|
Optimizing stimulus patterns for dense array TDCS with fewer sources than electrodes using a branch and bound algorithm |
Abstract | ||
---|---|---|
Dense array transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has become of increasing interest as a noninvasive modality to modulate brain function. To target a particular brain region of interest (ROI), using a dense electrode array placed on the scalp, the current injection pattern can be appropriately optimized. Previous optimization methods have assumed availability of individually controlled current sources for each non-reference electrode. This may be costly and impractical in a clinical setting. However, using fewer current sources than electrodes results in a non-convex combinatorial optimization problem. In this paper, we present a novel use of the branch and bound (BB) algorithm to find sub-optimal stimulus patterns with fewer current sources than electrodes. We present simulation results for both focal and spatially extended cortical ROIs. Our results suggest that only a few (2–3) independently controlled current sources can achieve comparable results to a full set (125 sources) to a tolerance of 5%. BB is computationally 3–5 orders of magnitude less demanding than exhaustive search. |
Year | DOI | Venue |
---|---|---|
2016 | 10.1109/ISBI.2016.7493251 | 2016 IEEE 13th International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging (ISBI) |
Keywords | Field | DocType |
tDCS,optimization,branch and bound,focality,dense array | Orders of magnitude (numbers),Branch and bound,Pattern recognition,Electrode array,Brute-force search,Computer science,Artificial intelligence,Region of interest,Stimulus (physiology),Transcranial direct-current stimulation,Electrode | Conference |
Volume | ISSN | Citations |
2016 | 1945-7928 | 3 |
PageRank | References | Authors |
0.42 | 2 | 9 |
Name | Order | Citations | PageRank |
---|---|---|---|
Seyhmus Guler | 1 | 4 | 0.78 |
Moritz Dannhauer | 2 | 19 | 3.04 |
Burak Erem | 3 | 23 | 6.13 |
Robert S MacLeod | 4 | 196 | 37.67 |
Don M. Tucker | 5 | 62 | 17.05 |
Sergei Turovets | 6 | 35 | 6.71 |
Phan Luu | 7 | 24 | 4.66 |
Waleed Meleis | 8 | 157 | 18.29 |
Dana H Brooks | 9 | 215 | 61.52 |