A Hybrid Neural Network for Electroencephalogram (EEG)-based Screening of Depression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Technological development is considered one of the major parts of this recent time as it helps to improve people's quality of life and resolve their issues and challenges faced in daily life. In recent times a happy life has been considered one of the major requirements for people as most people live under stress and face several mental disorders like depression, anxiety and loneliness. In the metal disorder space, depression is a major and common disease in recent society. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), it is estimated that 5% of adults suffer from depression. Diagnosis of depression has several challenges like time consuming patient counselling, over-dependence on doctors and accuracy of diagnosis. To resolve these diagnosis issues, computer aided system solution is required with the use of machine learning tool. The objective of this research is to develop hybrid deep learning model by using CNN and LSTM. The selected dataset which was used for this study contains a dataset of 945 subjects of mental disorders and healthy control subjects. Three hybrid models were developed and compared with different sets of extracted features. Raw data was pre-processed and applied in hybrid model and at the end model validated with the unknown EEG dataset. The hybrid model with entire features of dataset reported an accuracy of 98.0% and performed superior in comparison with other two models which trained with extracted features by using decision tree classifier. The results show that the developed hybrid CNN and LSTM model is accurate, less complex and useful in detecting mental disorders including depression using EEG signals.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".