Spatial permutation entropy distinguishes resting brain states
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We use ordinal analysis and spatial permutation entropy to distinguish between eyes-open and eyes-closed resting brain states. To do so, we analyze EEG data recorded with 64 electrodes from 109 healthy subjects, under two one-minute baseline runs: One with eyes open, and one with eyes closed. We use spatial ordinal analysis to distinguish between these states, where the permutation entropy is evaluated considering the spatial distribution of electrodes for each time instant. We analyze both raw and post-processed data considering only the alpha-band frequency (8–12Hz) which is known to be important for resting states in the brain. We conclude that spatial ordinal analysis captures information about correlations between time series in different electrodes. This allows the discrimination of eyes closed and eyes open resting states in both raw and filtered data. Filtering the data only amplifies the distinction between states. Importantly, our approach does not require EEG signal pre-processing, which is an advantage for real-time applications, such as brain-computer interfaces.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".