MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

DETECTION OF HUMAN PSYCHOLOGICAL STRESS WITH DEEP CONVOLUTIONAL NEURAL NETWORK USING DIFFERENT CRITERIAS FOR FEATURE SELECTION ON BASIS OF CONFIDENCE VALUE OF PAIRED t-TEST

2023· article· en· W4381686902 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mrs. Nikita R. Hatwar, Ujwalla G. Gawande, Ms. Chetana B. Thaokar

Bibliographic record

VenueIndian Journal of Computer Science and Engineering · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNeural Networks and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConvolutional neural networkBasis (linear algebra)Value (mathematics)Artificial intelligenceFeature selectionSelection (genetic algorithm)Pattern recognition (psychology)Feature (linguistics)Computer scienceTest (biology)Stress (linguistics)PsychologyMachine learningMathematicsGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Psychological stress has begun to be a social concern and is a major source of dysfunction in day-to-day life.Many neuropsychology ailments are implicated due to chronic stress.Sadness, seizures, cardiac arrest, and stroke are all increased by stress.The key prey of psychological stress is the human cerebrum, as revealed by a recent study of neuroscience, as the human cerebrum has the ability to recognize whether circumstances are terrifying or stressful.As an example, if an objective method for recognizing stress is used while considering the human cerebrum, the associated negative effect could be significantly reduced.As a result, a deep convolutional neural network involving raw EEG signals and a study of stressed subjects is suggested in this paper.Stress is induced in the experimental setting by using a mental arithmetic task (MAT) tool based on an established prototype, the Montreal imaging stress task (MIST).Task performance and subjective feedback confirmed the initiation of stress.EEG feature extraction, feature selection (paired t-test and four criteria), and classification (Deep Convolutional Neural Network) are all part of the proposed system.The proposed work gives good results when criteria 1, 2, and 3 are chosen as compared to criteria 4. Maximum accuracy is obtained from the Change in Power feature through the AF7 channel.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIndian Journal of Computer Science and EngineeringSame topicNeural Networks and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207