MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2123705983 · doi:10.1002/hbm.20647

Independent component analysis as a model‐free approach for the detection of BOLD changes related to epileptic spikes: A simulation study

2008· article· en· W2123705983 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Brain Mapping · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBlind Source Separation Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsIndependent component analysisElectroencephalographyPattern recognition (psychology)DeconvolutionArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceBiological systemNeurosciencePsychologyAlgorithmBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

EEG-fMRI in epileptic patients is commonly analyzed using the general linear model (GLM), which assumes a known hemodynamic response function (HRF) to epileptic spikes in the EEG. In contrast, independent component analysis (ICA) can extract Blood-Oxygenation Level Dependent (BOLD) responses without imposing constraints on the HRF. This technique was evaluated on data generated by superimposing artificial responses on real background fMRI signals. Simulations were run using a wide range of EEG spiking rates, HRF amplitudes, and activation regions. The data were decomposed by spatial ICA into independent components. A deconvolution method then identified component time courses significantly related to the simulated spikes, without constraining the shape of the HRF. Components matching the simulated activation regions ("concordant components") were found in 84.4% of simulations, while components at discordant locations were found in 12.2% of simulations. These false activations were often related to large artifacts that coincidentally occurred simultaneously with some of the random simulated spikes. The performance of the method depended closely on the simulation parameters; when the number of spikes was low, concordant components could only be identified when HRF amplitudes were large. Although ICA did not depend on the shape of the HRF, data processed with the GLM did not reveal the appropriate activation region when the HRF varied slightly from the canonical shape used in the model. ICA may thus be able to extract BOLD responses from EEG-fMRI data in epileptic patients, in a way that is robust to uncertainty and variability in the shape of the HRF.

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.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.705
Threshold uncertainty score0.509

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.240 · 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