MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2089499748 · doi:10.1109/iembs.2011.6091860

A novel unsupervised spike sorting algorithm for intracranial EEG

2011· article· en· W2089499748 on OpenAlexaff
Rajeev Yadav, Aashit Shah, Jeffrey A. Loeb, M.N.S. Swamy, Rajeev Agarwal

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke
KeywordsCodebookSpike (software development)Computer sciencePattern recognition (psychology)Spike sortingCluster analysisArtificial intelligenceElectroencephalographyPrincipal component analysisAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a novel, unsupervised spike classification algorithm for intracranial EEG. The method combines template matching and principal component analysis (PCA) for building a dynamic patient-specific codebook without a priori knowledge of the spike waveforms. The problem of misclassification due to overlapping classes is resolved by identifying similar classes in the codebook using hierarchical clustering. Cluster quality is visually assessed by projecting inter- and intra-clusters onto a 3D plot. Intracranial EEG from 5 patients was utilized to optimize the algorithm. The resulting codebook retains 82.1% of the detected spikes in non-overlapping and disjoint clusters. Initial results suggest a definite role of this method for both rapid review and quantitation of interictal spikes that could enhance both clinical treatment and research studies on epileptic patients.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations15
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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