MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2137650880 · doi:10.1109/iembs.2004.1403143

Time-frequency analysis of visual evoked potentials by means of matching pursuit with chirplet atoms

2005· article· en· W2137650880 on OpenAlexaff
Jie Cui, Willy Wong, S. Mann

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBlind Source Separation Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTime–frequency analysisMatching pursuitShort-time Fourier transformComputer scienceSpeech recognitionSIGNAL (programming language)Evoked potentialHarmonicsArtificial intelligenceFourier transformVisual evoked potentialsPattern recognition (psychology)Fundamental frequencyHarmonicComputer visionFourier analysisAcousticsMathematicsPhysicsPsychologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Detection of visual evoked potentials (VEP) elicited by repetitive stimuli is valuable in both laboratorial research and clinical practice. Therefore, knowing the characteristics of VEPs is of fundamental importance for adequate design of a signal detector. Usually, the signal is modeled as a steady-state VEP (ssVEP) consisting of the fundamental frequency and the higher harmonics, while ignoring the information contained in its transients (tVEP). We propose here to characterize both tVEP and ssVEP by chirplet time-frequency representation of VEP signal using a matching pursuit (MP) algorithm. Compared to the time-frequency analysis with short-time-Fourier-transform (STFT) and linear-prediction-coding (LPC) method, MP with chirplet shows not only clear characteristics of ssVEP, but a clear spindle-like time-frequency component of tVEP as well, which is not obvious in the other two methods.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Citations7
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBlind Source Separation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207