DeepIED: An epileptic discharge detector for EEG-fMRI based on deep learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Presurgical evaluation that can precisely delineate the epileptogenic zone (EZ) is one important step for successful surgical resection treatment of refractory epilepsy patients. The noninvasive EEG-fMRI recording technique combined with general linear model (GLM) analysis is considered an important tool for estimating the EZ. However, the manual marking of interictal epileptic discharges (IEDs) needed in this analysis is challenging and time-consuming because the quality of the EEG recorded inside the scanner is greatly deteriorated compared to the usual EEG obtained outside the scanner. This is one of main impediments to the widespread use of EEG-fMRI in epilepsy. We propose a deep learning based semi-automatic IED detector that can find the candidate IEDs in the EEG recorded inside the scanner which resemble sample IEDs marked in the EEG recorded outside the scanner. The manual marking burden is greatly reduced as the expert need only edit candidate IEDs. The model is trained on data from 30 patients. Validation of IEDs detection accuracy on another 37 consecutive patients shows our method can improve the median sensitivity from 50.0% for the previously proposed template-based method to 84.2%, with false positive rate as 5 events/min. Reproducibility validation on 15 patients is applied to evaluate if our method can produce similar hemodynamic response maps compared with the manual marking ground truth results. We explore the concordance between the maximum hemodynamic response and the intracerebral EEG defined EZ and find that both methods produce similar percentage of concordance (76.9%, 10 out of 13 patients, electrode was absent in the maximum hemodynamic response in two patients). This tool will make EEG-fMRI analysis more practical for clinical usage.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".