Relative entropy is an easy‐to‐use invasive electroencephalographic biomarker of the epileptogenic zone
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: High-frequency oscillations are considered among the most promising interictal biomarkers of the epileptogenic zone in patients suffering from pharmacoresistant focal epilepsy. However, there is no clear definition of pathological high-frequency oscillations, and the existing detectors vary in methodology, performance, and computational costs. This study proposes relative entropy as an easy-to-use novel interictal biomarker of the epileptic tissue. METHODS: We evaluated relative entropy and high-frequency oscillation biomarkers on intracranial electroencephalographic data from 39 patients with seizure-free postoperative outcome (Engel Ia) from three institutions. We tested their capability to localize the epileptogenic zone, defined as resected contacts located in the seizure onset zone. The performance was compared using areas under the receiver operating curves (AUROCs) and precision-recall curves. Then we tested whether a universal threshold can be used to delineate the epileptogenic zone across patients from different institutions. RESULTS: Relative entropy in the ripple band (80-250 Hz) achieved an average AUROC of .85. The normalized high-frequency oscillation rate in the ripple band showed an identical AUROC of .85. In contrast to high-frequency oscillations, relative entropy did not require any patient-level normalization and was easy and fast to calculate due to its clear and straightforward definition. One threshold could be set across different patients and institutions, because relative entropy is independent of signal amplitude and sampling frequency. SIGNIFICANCE: Although both relative entropy and high-frequency oscillations have a similar performance, relative entropy has significant advantages such as straightforward definition, computational speed, and universal interpatient threshold, making it an easy-to-use promising biomarker of the epileptogenic zone.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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.
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".