Identifying relevant asymmetry features of EEG for emotion processing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The left and right hemispheres of the brain process emotion differently. Neuroscientists have proposed two models to explain this difference. The first model states that the right hemisphere is dominant over the left to process all emotions. In contrast, the second model states that the left hemisphere processes positive emotions, whereas the right hemisphere processes negative emotions. Previous studies have used these asymmetry models to enhance the classification of emotions in machine learning models. However, little research has been conducted to explore how machine learning models can help identify associations between hemisphere asymmetries and emotion processing. To address this gap, we conducted two experiments using a subject-independent approach to explore how the asymmetry of the brain hemispheres is involved in processing happiness, sadness, fear, and neutral emotions. We analyzed electroencephalogram (EEG) signals from 15 subjects collected while they watched video clips evoking these four emotions. We derived asymmetry features from the recorded EEG signals by calculating the log ratio between the relative energy of symmetrical left and right nodes. Using the asymmetry features, we trained four binary logistic regressions, one for each emotion, to identify which features were more relevant to the predictions. The average AUC-ROC across the 15 subjects was 56.2, 54.6, 51.6, and 58.4% for neutral, sad, fear, and happy, respectively. We validated these results with an independent dataset, achieving comparable AUC-ROC values. Our results showed that brain lateralization was observed primarily in the alpha frequency bands, whereas for the other frequency bands, both hemispheres were involved in emotion processing. Furthermore, the logistic regression analysis indicated that the gamma and alpha bands were the most relevant for predicting emotional states, particularly for the lateral frontal, parietal, and temporal EEG pairs, such as FT7-FT8, T7-T8, and TP7-TP8. These findings provide valuable insights into which brain areas and frequency bands need to be considered when developing predictive models for emotion recognition.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".