MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4282541892 · doi:10.1002/hbm.25965

Ballistocardiogram suppression in concurrent <scp>EEG‐MRI</scp> by dynamic modeling of heartbeats

2022· article· en· W4282541892 on OpenAlexafffund
Hsin‐Ju Lee, Simon J. Graham, Wen‐Jui Kuo, Fa‐Hsuan Lin

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Brain Mapping · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacsCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Health Research InstitutesMinistry of Science and Technology, TaiwanCanada Foundation for Innovation
KeywordsElectroencephalographyNeurosciencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ballistocardiogram (BCG), the induced electric potentials by the head motion originating from heartbeats, is a prominent source of noise in electroencephalography (EEG) data during magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Although methods have been proposed to suppress the BCG artifact, more work considering the variability of cardiac cycles and head motion across time and subjects is needed to provide highly robust correction. Here, a method called "dynamic modeling of heartbeats" (DMH) is proposed to reduce BCG artifacts in EEG data recorded inside an MRI system. The DMH method models BCG artifacts by combining EEG points at time instants with similar dynamics. The modeled BCG artifact is then subtracted from the EEG recording to suppress the BCG artifact. Performance of DMH was tested and specifically compared with the Optimal Basis Set (OBS) method on EEG data recorded inside a 3T MRI system with either no MRI acquisition (Inside-MRI), echo-planar imaging (EPI-EEG), or fast MRI acquisition using simultaneous multi-slice and inverse imaging methods (SMS-InI-EEG). In a steady-state visual evoked response (SSVEP) paradigm, the 15-Hz oscillatory neuronal activity at the visual cortex after DMH processing was about 130% of that achieved by OBS processing for Inside-MRI, SMS-InI-EEG, and EPI-EEG conditions. The DMH method is computationally efficient for suppressing BCG artifacts and in the future may help to improve the quality of EEG data recorded in high-field MRI systems for neuroscientific and clinical applications.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.882
Threshold uncertainty score0.616

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.298 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman Brain MappingSame topicAdvanced MRI Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207