MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1981989525 · doi:10.1109/mlsp.2010.5588995

Feature extraction via dynamic PCA for epilepsy diagnosis and epileptic seizure detection

2010· article· en· W1981989525 on OpenAlexaff
Shengkun Xie, Anna T. Ławniczak, Yuedong Song, Píetro Lió

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEpilepsyFeature extractionComputer sciencePattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceEpileptic seizureClassifier (UML)ElectroencephalographyPrincipal component analysisData miningMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Feature extraction is an important technique for complex, multivariate data containing various attributes. In this paper, we propose new detection schemes to help diagnosing epilepsy and detecting the onset of epileptic seizures. These schemes are based on the dynamic principle component analysis (PCA) approach and on partially extracted features. We propose a detection performance measure for evaluation of performance of the detection schemes. We also introduce a method for determining the threshold of the PC classifier using the normalized partial energy sequence of the extracted features of the training data set. We use partially extracted features to act as a classifier to help diagnosing epilepsy and detecting the onset of epileptic seizures. A publicly available EEG database is employed to evaluate our detection schemes. Our study shows that the proposed detection schemes are very promising in assisting diagnosis of epilepsy and for epileptic seizure detection.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.265 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesFrench-language works237,207