Siamese Neural Networks for EEG-based Brain-computer Interfaces
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Motivated by the inconceivable capability of human brain in simultaneously processing multi-modal signals and its real-time feedback to the outer world events, there has been a surge of interest in establishing a communication bridge between the human brain and a computer, which are referred to as Brain-computer Interfaces (BCI). To this aim, monitoring the electrical activity of brain through Electroencephalogram (EEG) has emerged as the prime choice for BCI systems. To discover the underlying and specific features of brain signals for different mental tasks, a considerable number of research works are developed based on statistical and data-driven techniques. However, a major bottleneck in development of practical and commercial BCI systems is their limited performance when the number of mental tasks for classification is increased. In this work, we propose a new EEG processing and feature extraction paradigm based on Siamese neural networks, which can be conveniently merged and scaled up for multi-class problems. The idea of Siamese networks is to train a double-input neural network based on a contrastive loss-function, which provides the capability of verifying if two input EEG trials are from the same class or not. In this work, a Siamese architecture, which is developed based on Convolutional Neural Networks (CNN) and provides a binary output on the similarity of two inputs, is combined with One vs. Rest (OVR) and One vs. One (OVO) techniques to scale up for multi-class problems. The efficacy of this architecture is evaluated on a 4-class Motor Imagery (MI) dataset from BCI Competition IV2aand the results suggest a promising performance compared to its counterparts.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 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".