Mapping Interictal activity in epilepsy using a hidden Markov model: A magnetoencephalography study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Epilepsy is a highly heterogeneous neurological disorder with variable etiology, manifestation, and response to treatment. It is imperative that new models of epileptiform brain activity account for this variability, to identify individual needs and allow clinicians to curate personalized care. Here, we use a hidden Markov model (HMM) to create a unique statistical model of interictal brain activity for 10 pediatric patients. We use magnetoencephalography (MEG) data acquired as part of standard clinical care for patients at the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia. These data are routinely analyzed using excess kurtosis mapping (EKM); however, as cases become more complex (extreme multifocal and/or polymorphic activity), they become harder to interpret with EKM. We assessed the performance of the HMM against EKM for three patient groups, with increasingly complicated presentation. The difference in localization of epileptogenic foci for the two methods was 7 ± 2 mm (mean ± SD over all 10 patients); and 94% ± 13% of EKM temporal markers were matched by an HMM state visit. The HMM localizes epileptogenic areas (in agreement with EKM) and provides additional information about the relationship between those areas. A key advantage over current methods is that the HMM is a data-driven model, so the output is tuned to each individual. Finally, the model output is intuitive, allowing a user (clinician) to review the result and manually select the HMM epileptiform state, offering multiple advantages over previous methods and allowing for broader implementation of MEG epileptiform analysis in surgical decision-making for patients with intractable epilepsy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".