MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3162740984 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0251842

EEG microstate features for schizophrenia classification

2021· article· en· W3162740984 on OpenAlexaff
Kyungwon Kim, Nguyen Thanh Duc, Minsung Choi, Boreom Lee

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
FundersMinistry of Science and ICT, South KoreaNational Research Foundation
KeywordsMinistateElectroencephalographyFeature (linguistics)Artificial intelligenceSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)Pattern recognition (psychology)NeuroscienceComputer sciencePsychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Electroencephalography (EEG) microstate analysis is a method wherein spontaneous EEG activity is segmented at sub-second levels to analyze quasi-stable states. In particular, four archetype microstates and their features are known to reflect changes in brain state in neuropsychiatric diseases. However, previous studies have only reported differences in each microstate feature and have not determined whether microstate features are suitable for schizophrenia classification. Therefore, it is necessary to validate microstate features for schizophrenia classification. Nineteen microstate features, including duration, occurrence, and coverage as well as thirty-one conventional EEG features, including statistical, frequency, and temporal characteristics were obtained from resting-state EEG recordings of 14 patients diagnosed with schizophrenia and from 14 healthy (control) subjects. Machine-learning based multivariate analysis was used to evaluate classification performance. EEG recordings of patients and controls showed different microstate features. More importantly, when differentiating among patients and controls, EEG microstate features outperformed conventional EEG ones. The performance of the microstate features exceeded that of conventional EEG, even after optimization using recursive feature elimination. EEG microstate features applied with conventional EEG features also showed better classification performance than conventional EEG features alone. The current study is the first to validate the use of microstate features to discriminate schizophrenia, suggesting that EEG microstate features are useful for schizophrenia classification.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations117
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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