Artificial neural networks model design of Lorenz chaotic system for EEG pattern recognition and prediction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents the preliminary work of a multidisciplinary brain research program. The goal of this research program is to generate accurate and effective signals for non-invasive brain stimulation, and deliver a hardware prototype to monitor and treat motion related mental disease such as Parkinson's and Epilepsy. It was shown in previous research that Electroencephalogram (EEG) signals captured from brain activities demonstrate chaotic features. Artificial neural network (ANN) resembles brain biological neural network and can be used to simulate chaotic system. The trained ANN model can in turn be used to analyze and control brain activities. In order to investigate the chaotic phenomenons of EEG signals and develop function for automatic pattern recognition, large amount of EEG signals are required. However, EEG signals are prone to noise and the available data is very limited. It is possible to control and predict the time series outputs of chaotic systems with known equations. Therefore, in order to study the dynamic control of the brain neural networks, an ANN architecture is designed and optimized for implementing Lorenz attractor to simulate the chaotic states of EEG signals. The research includes chaotic system, ANN design and the optimization of ANN architecture, which is based on the consideration of hardware implementation. The designed ANN model is trained with Lorenz attractor outputs with a fixed set of system parameters and the optimized architecture is selected based on the training results of three training algorithms and 16 ANN architectures with different number of hidden neurons.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".