MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2769149776 · doi:10.3390/s17122725

Adaptive Spatial Filter Based on Similarity Indices to Preserve the Neural Information on EEG Signals during On-Line Processing

2017· article· en· W2769149776 on OpenAlexaff
Denis Delisle-Rodríguez, Ana Cecilia Villa-Parra, Teodiano Bastos-Filho, Alberto López-Delis, Anselmo Frizera, Sridhar Krishnan, Eduardo Rocón

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersSecretaría de Educación Superior, Ciencia, Tecnología e InnovaciónConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa e Inovação do Espírito SantoMinisterio de Economía y CompetitividadCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsPattern recognition (psychology)Brain–computer interfaceElectroencephalographySimilarity (geometry)Artificial intelligenceComputer scienceStandard deviationSpatial filterFilter (signal processing)Correlation coefficientCanonical correlationAdaptive filterSignal processingSpeech recognitionComputer visionMathematicsStatisticsMachine learningAlgorithmImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work presents a new on-line adaptive filter, which is based on a similarity analysis between standard electrode locations, in order to reduce artifacts and common interferences throughout electroencephalography (EEG) signals, but preserving the useful information. Standard deviation and Concordance Correlation Coefficient (CCC) between target electrodes and its correspondent neighbor electrodes are analyzed on sliding windows to select those neighbors that are highly correlated. Afterwards, a model based on CCC is applied to provide higher values of weight to those correlated electrodes with lower similarity to the target electrode. The approach was applied to brain computer-interfaces (BCIs) based on Canonical Correlation Analysis (CCA) to recognize 40 targets of steady-state visual evoked potential (SSVEP), providing an accuracy (ACC) of 86.44 ± 2.81%. In addition, also using this approach, features of low frequency were selected in the pre-processing stage of another BCI to recognize gait planning. In this case, the recognition was significantly ( p < 0.01 ) improved for most of the subjects ( A C C ≥ 74.79 % ) , when compared with other BCIs based on Common Spatial Pattern, Filter Bank-Common Spatial Pattern, and Riemannian Geometry.

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)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.420
Threshold uncertainty score0.617

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 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

Citations28
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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