MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Efficient Blinking Component Estimation in Subspace-Based EEG and MEG Analysis

2019· article· en· W3013781119 on OpenAlexaff
Younes Sadat-Nejad, Soosan Beheshti

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndependent component analysisComputer scienceArtifact (error)PreprocessorSubspace topologyArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)Mean squared errorPrincipal component analysisDimensionality reductionElectroencephalographyProjection (relational algebra)AlgorithmMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Removing EyeBlink (EB) artifact is often an essential preprocessing step of EEG/MEG analysis. Subspace-based methods such as Independent Component Analysis (ICA) and Signal Source Projection (SSP) are well-known methods of EB artifact removal. However, these methods require preknowledge of the number of components (NoC) involved in the blinking segments which is unknown and estimated by visual inspection. Here, we provide a reliable and efficient method for estimating the NoC of EB. The method utilizes an SVD denoising approach denoted by Number of Source Eigenvalue Error (NoSEE). The proposed method performance is examined by synthetic EEG, and is validated by real MEG data. Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) is used to evaluate the performance while visual inspection on real MEG data is used to validate the algorithms results. In both cases, the proposed method provides optimum NoC in the sense of MSE minimization and consistency with the real data. The method provides more accurate results compared to manual methods. In addition, the low computational complexity of the algorithm results in much less processing time for this automatic NoC calculator compared to the trial and error procedure of the manual methods which enables the algorithm to be used in online EEG analysis.

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)0.000
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.248 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces→French-language works237,207→