MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2018946478 · doi:10.1109/iembs.2010.5626781

A novel morphology-based classifier for automatic detection of epileptic seizures

2010· article· en· W2018946478 on OpenAlexaff
Rajeev Yadav, Rajeev Agarwal, M. N. S. Swamy

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectroencephalographyRhythmEpilepsyEpileptic seizurePattern recognition (psychology)Computer scienceClassifier (UML)Artificial intelligenceNeuroscienceMedicinePsychologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Most of the automatic seizure detection schemes reported in the literature are complex for detecting seizures that are of (a) short duration, (b) minimal amplitude evolution, or (c) non-rhythmic mixed frequency epileptic activity. We present a novel morphology-based classifier to detect epileptic seizures for intracranial EEG recording. The method characterizes epileptic seizure by detecting continual presence of sharp half-waves in the EEG. Performance is evaluated on single channel intracranial EEG of seven patients, and compared to two previously developed methods for intracranial EEG recordings by our research group. The method detects seizure of varying types (rhythmic, non-rhythmic, short- and long- seizures) with a sensitivity of 100%, a false detection rate of 0.1/h and an average onset delay of 9.1 s. The method outperforms the two previously developed methods and is computationally simple for real-time application. Preliminary results on seven patients data are very promising.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations8
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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