MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3133484923 · doi:10.1002/cjs.11592

Scalable spatio‐temporal Bayesian analysis of high‐dimensional electroencephalography data

2021· article· en· W3133484923 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Shariq Mohammed, Dipak K. Dey

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Statistics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBlind Source Separation Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceScalabilityBayesian probabilityPattern recognition (psychology)ElectroencephalographyData miningKronecker productMachine learningKronecker delta

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We present a scalable Bayesian modelling approach for identifying brain regions that respond to a certain stimulus and use them to classify subjects. More specifically, we deal with multi‐subject electroencephalography (EEG) data with a binary response distinguishing between alcoholic and control groups. The covariates are matrix‐variate with measurements taken from each subject at different locations across multiple time points. EEG data have a complex structure with both spatial and temporal attributes. We use a divide‐and‐conquer strategy and build separate local models, that is, one model at each time point. We employ Bayesian variable selection approaches using a structured continuous spike‐and‐slab prior to identify the locations that respond to a certain stimulus. We incorporate the spatio‐temporal structure through a Kronecker product of the spatial and temporal correlation matrices. We develop a highly scalable estimation algorithm, using likelihood approximation, to deal with large number of parameters in the model. Variable selection is done via clustering of the locations based on their duration of activation. We use scoring rules to evaluate the prediction performance. Simulation studies demonstrate the efficiency of our scalable algorithm in terms of estimation and fast computation. We present results using our scalable approach on a case study of multi‐subject EEG data.

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.617
Threshold uncertainty score0.947

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of StatisticsSame topicBlind Source Separation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207