MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384557778 · doi:10.3390/s23146434

Electroencephalography Signal Processing: A Comprehensive Review and Analysis of Methods and Techniques

2023· review· en· W4384557778 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsElectroencephalographySignal processingComputer sciencePreprocessorSIGNAL (programming language)Feature extractionArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)Digital signal processingPsychologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The electroencephalography (EEG) signal is a noninvasive and complex signal that has numerous applications in biomedical fields, including sleep and the brain-computer interface. Given its complexity, researchers have proposed several advanced preprocessing and feature extraction methods to analyze EEG signals. In this study, we analyze a comprehensive review of numerous articles related to EEG signal processing. We searched the major scientific and engineering databases and summarized the results of our findings. Our survey encompassed the entire process of EEG signal processing, from acquisition and pretreatment (denoising) to feature extraction, classification, and application. We present a detailed discussion and comparison of various methods and techniques used for EEG signal processing. Additionally, we identify the current limitations of these techniques and analyze their future development trends. We conclude by offering some suggestions for future research in the field of EEG signal processing.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.952
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.435
Teacher spread0.326 · 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