Matt Angle retweetledi

Many ECoG proponents claim their modality is equivalent to intracortical when it comes to brain-computer interface (BCI) performance – but the science says otherwise.
Intracortical BCIs record single-neuron conversations, while surface-level ECoGs record the noisy, averaged activity of 50,000+ neurons. Even when using powerful AI signal processing downstream, ECoG devices simply cannot recoup the resolution that intracortical BCIs record in the first place.
This difference is apparent in speech restoration applications, where intracortical BCIs have demonstrated sub-1% error rates and real-time decoding from 125,000-word vocabularies. ECoG's best clinical results plateau at a three-year-old's vocabulary with multi-second delays.
ECoG certainly has its place in recording large sections of the brain, like in seizure and functional cortical mapping. But for advanced neuroprosthetics that demand high-fidelity data, you need access to rich, high-dimensional neural data – and that's only possible through intracortical BCI.
Our latest blog explores the neurophysiology, the physics of signal attenuation, and the clinical evidence that shows why intracortical is the leading modality for complex applications. Read on for more.
#BrainComputerInterface #Neurotechnology #NeuralEngineering #BCIresearch
paradromics.com/blog/intracort…
English
















