MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2029410598 · doi:10.3390/s140712784

Classification of EEG Signals Using a Multiple Kernel Learning Support Vector Machine

2014· article· en· W2029410598 on OpenAlexaff
Xiaoou Li, Xun Chen, Yuning Yan, Wenshi Wei, Z. Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersShanghai Municipal Education Commission
KeywordsSupport vector machineArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceRadial basis function kernelBrain–computer interfacePattern recognition (psychology)Kernel (algebra)Polynomial kernelMultiple kernel learningElectroencephalographyMachine learningKernel methodMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, a multiple kernel learning support vector machine algorithm is proposed for the identification of EEG signals including mental and cognitive tasks, which is a key component in EEG-based brain computer interface (BCI) systems. The presented BCI approach included three stages: (1) a pre-processing step was performed to improve the general signal quality of the EEG; (2) the features were chosen, including wavelet packet entropy and Granger causality, respectively; (3) a multiple kernel learning support vector machine (MKL-SVM) based on a gradient descent optimization algorithm was investigated to classify EEG signals, in which the kernel was defined as a linear combination of polynomial kernels and radial basis function kernels. Experimental results showed that the proposed method provided better classification performance compared with the SVM based on a single kernel. For mental tasks, the average accuracies for 2-class, 3-class, 4-class, and 5-class classifications were 99.20%, 81.25%, 76.76%, and 75.25% respectively. Comparing stroke patients with healthy controls using the proposed algorithm, we achieved the average classification accuracies of 89.24% and 80.33% for 0-back and 1-back tasks respectively. Our results indicate that the proposed approach is promising for implementing human-computer interaction (HCI), especially for mental task classification and identifying suitable brain impairment candidates.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations131
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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