MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2979305364 · doi:10.1109/embc.2019.8856905

Higher Resolution sLORETA (HR-sLORETA) in EEG Source Imaging

2019· article· en· W2979305364 on OpenAlexaff
Younes Sadat-Nejad, Soosan Beheshti

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBlind Source Separation Techniques
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThresholdingArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceOtsu's methodPattern recognition (psychology)Image resolutionResolution (logic)Subspace topologyElectroencephalographyComputer visionImage (mathematics)Neuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

sLORETA is one of the well-established EEG source localization methods that is popular for its satisfactory estimation, simplicity, and fast computation. However, the method has a low-resolution and requires manual post-processing thresholding to provide a sparser solution with acceptable resolution in source detection. Here we propose a subspace based thresholding that results in a higher resolution brain imaging based on minimizing a desired least square source detection error. Simulation results show the proposed method, denoted by HR-sLORETA, provides stable and high resolution solution in terms of Percentage of Undetected Sources (PUS) and Spatial Dispersion (SD) compared to the existing manual thresholding approaches as well as Otsu thresholding approach. It is shown that HR-sLORETA outperforms Otsu, which is the only other available automatic thresholding method, in scenarios with three or more sources.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBlind Source Separation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207