Wavelet-Based Muscle Artefact Noise Reduction for Short Latency rTMS Evoked Potentials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a new method of reducing the noise in the EEG response signal recorded during repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS). This noise is principally composed of the residual stimulus artefact and millivolt amplitude compound muscle action potentials (CMAP) recorded from the scalp muscles and precludes analysis of the cortical evoked potentials, especially during the first 20-ms post stimulus. The proposed method uses the wavelet transform with a fourth-order Daubechies mother wavelet and a novel coefficient reduction algorithm based on cortical amplitude thresholds. Four other mother wavelets as well as digital filtering have been tested, and the Coiflets 2 and 3 also found to be effective with Coiflet 3 results marginally better than Daubechies 4. The approach has been tested using data recorded from 16 normal subjects during a study of cortical sensitivity to rTMS at different cortical locations using stimulation amplitudes, frequencies, and sites typically used in clinical practice to treat major depressive disorder.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".