MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1989245491 · doi:10.1088/1741-2560/10/4/046018

Dynamic topographical pattern classification of multichannel prefrontal NIRS signals

2013· article· en· W1989245491 on OpenAlexafffund
Larissa Schudlo, Sarah Power, Tom Chau

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neural Engineering · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOptical Imaging and Spectroscopy Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoHolland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation Hospital
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPattern recognition (psychology)Computer scienceArtificial intelligenceLinear discriminant analysisBrain–computer interfaceClassifier (UML)Brain activity and meditationMajority ruleMotor imageryLinear classifierFeature extractionElectroencephalographyNeurosciencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) is an optical imaging technique that has recently been considered for brain-computer interface (BCI) applications. To date, NIRS-BCI studies have primarily made use of temporal features of brain activity, derived from the time-course of optical signals measured from discrete locations, to differentiate mental states. However, functional brain imaging studies have indicated that the spatial distribution of haemodynamic activity is also rich in information. Thus, the progression of a response over both time and space may be valuable to brain state classification. In this paper, we investigate the implication of including spatiotemporal features in the single-trial classification of haemodynamic events for a two-class problem by exploiting this information from dynamic NIR topograms. APPROACH: The value of spatiotemporal information was explored through a comparative analysis of four different classification schemes performed on multichannel NIRS data collected from the prefrontal cortex during a mental arithmetic activation task and rest. Employing a linear discriminant classifier, data were analysed using spatiotemporal features, temporal features, and a collective pool of spatiotemporal and temporal features. We also considered a majority vote combination of three classifiers; each established using one of the above feature sets. Lastly, two separate task durations (20 and 10 s) were considered for feature extraction. MAIN RESULTS: With features from the longer task interval, the highest overall classification accuracy was achieved using the majority voting classifier (76.1 ± 8.4%), which was greater than the accuracy obtained using temporal features alone (73.5 ± 8.5%) (F3,144 = 7.04, p = 0.0002). While results from the shorter task duration were lower overall, the classifier employing only spatiotemporal features (with an average accuracy of 67.9 ± 9.3%) achieved a higher average accuracy than the rate obtained using only temporal features (64.4 ± 8.4%) (F3,144 = 18.58, p < 10(-4)). SIGNIFICANCE: Collectively, these results suggest that spatiotemporal information can be of value in the analysis of functional NIRS data, and improved classification rates may be obtained in future NIRS-BCI applications with the inclusion of this information.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations32
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neural EngineeringSame topicOptical Imaging and Spectroscopy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207