MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2092905247 · doi:10.1109/tbme.2013.2280143

A Constrained ICA Approach for Real-Time Cardiac Artifact Rejection in Magnetoencephalography

2013· article· en· W2092905247 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Lukas Breuer, Jürgen Dammers, Timothy P. L. Roberts, N. Jon Shah

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of TorontoDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftUniversity of Cambridge
KeywordsInfomaxMagnetoencephalographyIndependent component analysisFastICAComputer scienceArtifact (error)Artificial intelligenceSignal processingPattern recognition (psychology)SIGNAL (programming language)Brain–computer interfaceSpeech recognitionElectroencephalographyBlind signal separationDigital signal processingNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recently, magnetoencephalography (MEG)-based real-time brain computing interfaces (BCI) have been developed to enable novel and promising methods of neuroscience research and therapy. Artifact rejection prior to source localization largely enhances the localization accuracy. However, many BCI approaches neglect real-time artifact removal due to its time consuming processing. With cardiac artifact rejection for real-time analysis (CARTA), we introduce a novel algorithm capable of real-time cardiac artifact (CA) rejection. The method is based on constrained independent component analysis (ICA), where a priori information of the underlying source signal is used to optimize and accelerate signal decomposition. In CARTA, this is performed by estimating the subject's individual density distribution of the cardiac activity, which leads to a subject-specific signal decomposition algorithm. We show that the new method is capable of effectively reducing CAs within one iteration and a time delay of 1 ms. In contrast, Infomax and Extended Infomax ICA converged not until seven iterations, while FastICA needs at least ten iterations. CARTA was tested and applied to data from three different but most common MEG systems (4-D-Neuroimaging, VSM MedTech Inc., and Elekta Neuromag). Therefore, the new method contributes to reliable signal analysis utilizing BCI approaches.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.828
Threshold uncertainty score0.728

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.224
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 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

Citations29
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical EngineeringSame topicEEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesFrench-language works237,207