MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2083516195 · doi:10.1109/icassp.2013.6637848

Regularized LDA based on separable scatter matrices for classification of spatio-spectral EEG patterns

2013· article· en· W2083516195 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad Shahin Mahanta, Amirhossein S. Aghaei, Konstantinos N. Plataniotis

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSeparable spaceLinear discriminant analysisRandom variatePattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceDiscriminantRegularization (linguistics)Matrix (chemical analysis)Computer scienceScatter matrixFeature extractionSupport vector machineMathematicsAlgorithmCovariance matrixStatisticsRandom variable

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Linear discriminant analysis (LDA) is a commonly-used feature extraction technique. For matrix-variate data such as spatio-spectral electroencephalogram (EEG), matrix-variate LDA formulations have been proposed. Compared to the standard vector-variate LDA, these formulations assume a separable structure for the within-class and between-class scatter matrices; these structured parameters can be estimated more accurately with a limited number of training samples. However, separable scatters do not fit some data, resulting in aggravated performance for matrix-variate methods. This paper first proposes a common framework for the vector-variate LDA with non-separable scatters and our previously proposed solution with separable scatters. Then, a regularization of the non-separable scatter estimates toward the separable estimates is introduced. This novel regularized framework integrates vector-variate and matrix-variate approaches, and allows the estimated scatter matrices to adapt to the data characteristics. Experiments on data set V from BCI competition III demonstrate that the proposed framework achieves a considerable classification performance gain.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.258
Threshold uncertainty score0.848

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations9
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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