MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2059188340 · doi:10.1109/embc.2012.6347339

A machine learning approach using P300 responses to investigate effect of clozapine therapy

2012· article· en· W2059188340 on OpenAlexaff
Maryam Ravan, Duncan J. MacCrimmon, Gary Hasey, J.P. Reilly, Ahmad Khodayari-Rostamabad

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectroencephalographyComputer scienceClozapineArtificial intelligenceSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)Normalization (sociology)Brain activity and meditationNeurosciencePattern recognition (psychology)Psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Clozapine (CLZ) is uniquely effective as a treatment for medication resistant schizophrenia. Information regarding its mechanism of action may offer clues to the pathophysiology of the disease and to improved treatment. In this study we employ a machine learning (ML) analysis of P300 evoked potentials obtained from quantitative electroencephalography (QEEG) data to identify changes in the brain induced by CLZ treatment. We employ brain source localization (BSL) on the EEG signals to extract source waveforms from specified regions of the brain. A subset of 8 features is selected from a large set of candidate features (consisting of spectral coherences between all identified source waveforms at multiple frequencies) that discriminate (by means of a classifier) between the pre- and post-treatment data for the schizophrenics (SCZ) most responsive to CLZ. We show these same selected features also discriminate between pre-treatment most responsive SCZ and healthy volunteers (HV), but not after treatment. Of note, these same features discriminate the least responsive SCZ from HV both pre- and post-treatment. This analysis suggests that the net beneficial effects of CLZ in SCZ are reflected in a normalization of P300 brain-source generators.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.438

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations6
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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