AUTHOR=Galaz Prieto Fernando , Samavaki Maryam , Pursiainen Sampsa TITLE=Lattice layout and optimizer effect analysis for generating optimal transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) montages through the metaheuristic L1L1 method JOURNAL=Frontiers in Human Neuroscience VOLUME=18 YEAR=2024 URL=https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/human-neuroscience/articles/10.3389/fnhum.2024.1201574 DOI=10.3389/fnhum.2024.1201574 ISSN=1662-5161 ABSTRACT=Introduction

This study focuses on broadening the applicability of the metaheuristic L1-norm fitted and penalized (L1L1) optimization method in finding a current pattern for multichannel transcranial electrical stimulation (tES). The metaheuristic L1L1 optimization framework defines the tES montage via linear programming by maximizing or minimizing an objective function with respect to a pair of hyperparameters.

Methods

In this study, we explore the computational performance and reliability of different optimization packages, algorithms, and search methods in combination with the L1L1 method. The solvers from Matlab R2020b, MOSEK 9.0, Gurobi Optimizer, CVX's SeDuMi 1.3.5, and SDPT3 4.0 were employed to produce feasible results through different linear programming techniques, including Interior-Point (IP), Primal-Simplex (PS), and Dual-Simplex (DS) methods. To solve the metaheuristic optimization task of L1L1, we implement an exhaustive and recursive search along with a well-known heuristic direct search as a reference algorithm.

Results

Based on our results, and the given optimization task, Gurobi's IP was, overall, the preferable choice among Interior-Point while MOSEK's PS and DS packages were in the case of Simplex methods. These methods provided substantial computational time efficiency for solving the L1L1 method regardless of the applied search method.

Discussion

While the best-performing solvers show that the L1L1 method is suitable for maximizing either focality and intensity, a few of these solvers could not find a bipolar configuration. Part of the discrepancies between these methods can be explained by a different sensitivity with respect to parameter variation or the resolution of the lattice provided.