Deep Learning Recurrent Neural Network for Concussion Classification in Adolescents Using Raw Electroencephalography Signals: Toward a Minimal Number of Sensors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Artificial neural networks (ANNs) are showing increasing promise as decision support tools in medicine and particularly in neuroscience and neuroimaging. Recently, there has been increasing work on using neural networks to classify individuals with concussion using electroencephalography (EEG) data. However, to date the need for research grade equipment has limited the applications to clinical environments. We recently developed a deep learning long short-term memory (LSTM) based recurrent neural network to classify concussion using raw, resting state data using 64 EEG channels and achieved high accuracy in classifying concussion. Here, we report on our efforts to develop a clinically practical system using a minimal subset of EEG sensors. EEG data from 23 athletes who had suffered a sport-related concussion and 35 non-concussed, control athletes were used for this study. We tested and ranked each of the original 64 channels based on its contribution toward the concussion classification performed by the original LSTM network. The top scoring channels were used to train and test a network with the same architecture as the previously trained network. We found that with only six of the top scoring channels the classifier identified concussions with an accuracy of 94%. These results show that it is possible to classify concussion using raw, resting state data from a small number of EEG sensors, constituting a first step toward developing portable, easy to use EEG systems that can be used in a clinical setting.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".