MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4229082241 · doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2022.117330

Seizure localisation with attention-based graph neural networks

2022· article· en· W4229082241 on OpenAlexaff
Daniele Grattarola, Lorenzo Livi, Cesare Alippi, Richard Wennberg, Taufik A. Valiante

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Systems with Applications · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity of TorontoOntario Brain InstituteUniversity of Manitoba
FundersSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungNational Science Foundation
KeywordsIctalComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceRobustness (evolution)EpilepsyElectroencephalographyArtificial neural networkFunctional connectivityPattern recognition (psychology)GraphMachine learningNeurosciencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we introduce a machine learning methodology for localising the seizure onset zone in subjects with epilepsy. We represent brain states as functional networks obtained from intracranial electroencephalography recordings, using correlation and the phase-locking value to quantify the coupling between different brain areas. Our method is based on graph neural networks (GNNs) and the attention mechanism, two of the most significant advances in artificial intelligence in recent years. Specifically, we train a GNN to distinguish between functional networks associated with interictal and ictal phases. The GNN is equipped with an attention-based layer that automatically learns to identify those regions of the brain (associated with individual electrodes) that are most important for a correct classification. The localisation of these regions does not require any prior information regarding the seizure onset zone. We show that the regions of interest identified by the GNN strongly correlate with the localisation of the seizure onset zone reported by electroencephalographers. We report results both for human patients and for simulators of brain activity. We also show that our GNN exhibits uncertainty for those patients for which the clinical localisation was unsuccessful, highlighting the robustness of the proposed approach.

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)0.004
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations32
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Systems with ApplicationsSame topicEEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesFrench-language works237,207