MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3184894247 · doi:10.18280/ts.380323

Quantitative Analysis of EEG Slow Wave Activity Based on MinPeakProminence Method

2021· article· en· W3184894247 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sema Yıldırım, Hasan Erdinç Koçer, Ahmet Ekmekçi

Bibliographic record

VenueTraitement du signal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDivision of Graduate EducationKonya Teknik Üniversitesi
KeywordsElectroencephalographyOccipital regionBrain wavessortSensitivity (control systems)EpilepsyArtificial intelligenceComputer sciencePattern recognition (psychology)Statistical analysisAudiologyPsychologyNeuroscienceMedicineStatisticsMathematicsAnatomyInformation retrievalEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Persistent, unchanging, and non-reactive focal or generalized abnormal Slow Wave (SW) activities in an awake adult patient are examined pathologically. Although these waves in Electroencephalogram (EEG) are much less prominent than transient activities in some areas, it is not possible to understand them easily by looking at the EEG. For this reason, reliable computer programs that can sort out Slow Waves (SWs) correctly are needed. In this study, a new method based on MinPeakProminence that can detect abnormal SW activities was developed. To test the performance of the study, the data collected from Selcuk University Hospital (22 subjects - epilepsy and various neurological diseases) and Bonn Hospital (only normal A dataset) were used. Various statistical performance measurement methods were used to search the results. The results of this analysis revealed that the classification success, sensitivity and specificity values obtained with the SUH dataset were 96.5%, 93.3% and 96.1%, respectively. In the results of the experiments made with the Bonn dataset, 100% classification success was achieved. Besides, according to the analyses, it was found that SWs are frequently seen in the posterior regions of the brain, especially in the parietal and occipital regions in the SUH dataset.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.394
Threshold uncertainty score0.772

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTraitement du signalSame topicEEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesFrench-language works237,207