Distinguishing between different percolation regimes in noisy dynamic networks with an application to epileptic seizures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In clinical neuroscience, epileptic seizures have been associated with the sudden emergence of coupled activity across the brain. The resulting functional networks-in which edges indicate strong enough coupling between brain regions-are consistent with the notion of percolation, which is a phenomenon in complex networks corresponding to the sudden emergence of a giant connected component. Traditionally, work has concentrated on noise-free percolation with a monotonic process of network growth, but real-world networks are more complex. We develop a class of random graph hidden Markov models (RG-HMMs) for characterizing percolation regimes in noisy, dynamically evolving networks in the presence of edge birth and edge death. This class is used to understand the type of phase transitions undergone in a seizure, and in particular, distinguishing between different percolation regimes in epileptic seizures. We develop a hypothesis testing framework for inferring putative percolation mechanisms. As a necessary precursor, we present an EM algorithm for estimating parameters from a sequence of noisy networks only observed at a longitudinal subsampling of time points. Our results suggest that different types of percolation can occur in human seizures. The type inferred may suggest tailored treatment strategies and provide new insights into the fundamental science of 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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".