MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2967417293 · doi:10.1109/cibcb.2019.8791450

Optimum Window Size and Overlap for Robust Probabilistic Prediction of Seizures with iEEG

2019· article· en· W2967417293 on OpenAlexaff
Behrooz Abbaszadeh, M.C.E. Yagoub

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIctalSupport vector machineEpilepsyElectroencephalographyComputer scienceSliding window protocolArtificial intelligenceProbabilistic logicPattern recognition (psychology)Sensitivity (control systems)Window (computing)Machine learningPsychologyNeuroscienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Epilepsy is a brain disorder that can significantly affect a patient's health. Therefore, seizure prediction techniques have gained a lot of attention to minimize the potential damages caused by epilepsy and improve the quality-of-life of epileptic patients. In this paper, an algorithm based on the linear Support Vector Machine (SVM) tool was proposed to classify intracranial electroencephalography (iEEG) signals as ictal or interical, in order to efficiently perform human seizure prediction. One of the most important parameters in predicting seizure is the size of the sliding window, whose optimization may significantly affect performance, as well as overlapping between windows. In this study, an optimum sliding window and overlapping rate are proposed for efficient seizure prediction. They allow accurate prediction of seizure events from a large set of EEG data. Applied to iEEG recordings of eight patients in the Freiburg EEG database, the proposed approach exhibits a sensitivity of 68% and specificity of 100% using 2-second-long window and 50% overlapping via 10 fold-cross validation.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.204
Threshold uncertainty score0.255

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations8
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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