A convolutional-recurrent neural network approach to resting-state EEG classification in Parkinson’s disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Parkinson’s disease (PD) is expected to become more common, particularly with an aging population. Diagnosis and monitoring of the disease typically rely on the laborious examination of physical symptoms by medical experts, which is necessarily limited and may not detect the prodromal stages of the disease. New Method We propose a lightweight (∼20K parameters) deep learning model, to discriminate between resting-state EEG recorded from people with PD and healthy controls. The proposed CRNN model consists of convolutional neural networks (CNN) and a recurrent neural network (RNN) with gated recurrent units (GRUs). The 1D CNN layers are designed to extract spatiotemporal features across EEG channels, which are subsequently supplied to the GRUs to discover temporal features pertinent to the classification. Results The CRNN model achieved 99.2% accuracy, 98.9% precision, and 99.4% recall in classifying PD from healthy controls (HC). Interrogating the model, we further demonstrate that the model is sensitive to dopaminergic medication effects and predominantly uses phase information of the EEG signals. Comparison with Existing Methods The CRNN model achieves superior performance compared to baseline machine learning methods and other recently proposed deep learning models. Conclusion The approach proposed in this study adequately extracts the spatial and temporal features in multi-channel EEG signals that enable the accurate differentiation between PD and HC. It has excellent potential for use as an oscillatory biomarker for assisting in the diagnosis and monitoring of people with PD. Future studies to further improve and validate the model’s performance in clinical practice are warranted.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".