MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2124402118 · doi:10.1109/newcas.2014.6934040

Epilepsy seizure prediction using graph theory

2014· article· en· W2124402118 on OpenAlexafffund
Tahar Haddad, Larbi Talbi, Ahmed Lakhssassi, Naim Ben‐Hamida, Sadok Aouini

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsCiena (Canada)Université du Québec en Outaouais
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCMC Microsystems
KeywordsEpilepsyGraphGraph theoryCorrelationComputer scienceHippocampal formationPattern recognition (psychology)Seizure thresholdArtificial intelligenceMathematicsTheoretical computer sciencePsychologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Seizures due to Hippocampal origins are very common amongst epileptic patients. This article presents a novel seizure prediction approach based on graph theory. The early identification of seizure signature allows for various preventive measures to be undertaken. The proposed approach consists of observing a high correlation level between any pair of electrodes along with voltage peaks in the Delta frequencies. Statistical analysis tools were used to determine threshold levels for this frequency sub-band. A graph topology involving IEEG electrodes characterizes seizure signatures for each patient. In order to validate the proposed approach, six patients from both sexes and various age groups with temporal epilepsies originating from the hippocampal area were studied. An average seizure prediction of 30 minutes, a detection accuracy of 72%, and a false positive rate of 0% were accomplished throughout 200 hours of recording time.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations5
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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