MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4206311413 · doi:10.1017/cjn.2021.303

P.021 Electdetect: An Artificial Neural Network for the Detection of Artifacts in intracranial EEG Recordings From Patients with Epilepsy

2021· article· en· W4206311413 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Marco Istasy, AG Schjetnan, Omid Talakoub, Taufik A. Valiante

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsToronto Public HealthSystems, Applications & Products in Data Processing (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStereoelectroencephalographyEpilepsyElectroencephalographyArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceArtifact (error)PreprocessorArtificial neural networkPattern recognition (psychology)Set (abstract data type)SpectrogramModality (human–computer interaction)IctalPsychologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Intracranial electroencephalography (iEEG) recordings are obtained from the sampling of sub-cortical structures and provide extraordinary insight into the spatiotemporal dynamics of the brain. As these recordings are increasingly obtained at higher channel counts and greater sampling frequencies, preprocessing through visual inspection is becoming untenable. Consequently, artificial neural networks (ANNs) are now being leveraged for this task. Methods: One-hour recordings from six patients diagnosed with drug-resistant epilepsy at Toronto Western Hospital were obtained alongside fiduciary ECG and EOG activity. R-wave peaks and local maxima were identified in the ECG and EOG recordings, respectively, and were time-mapped onto the iEEG recordings to delimit one-second epochs around 1.6 million cardiac and 600 thousand ocular artifacts. Epochs were then split into train-test-evaluation sets and fed into an ANN as one-second spectrograms (0 - 1,000 Hz) over 30-time steps. Results: The ANN model achieved formidable classification results on the evaluation set with an F1, positive predictive value, and sensitivity scores of 0.93. Furthermore, model architecture computed the classification probability at each time-step and enabled insight into the spatiotemporal features driving classification. Conclusions: We expect this research to promote the public sharing of new ANN from multiple institutions and enable novel automated algorithms for artifact detection in iEEG recordings.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques→Same topicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces→French-language works237,207→