MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Parkinson’s disease diagnosis through electroencephalographic signal processing and neural network classification

2024· article· en· W4392370905 on OpenAlexaff
Junfeng Zou, Yufei Zhao

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied and Computational Engineering · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectroencephalographyParkinson's diseaseDiseaseArtificial neural networkComputer scienceMATLABArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)Machine learningMedicinePsychologyNeurosciencePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Parkinson's disease (PD) is the second most prevalent neurological disorder, following Alzheimer's. Despite this, there is currently no successful treatment for PD. Therefore, early detection of Parkinson's disease is crucial for preventing its progression. To address this, a computer-aided diagnosis system has been implemented to identify any abnormalities. Significant research has been conducted using speech and gait analysis. However, there is growing interest in using electroencephalographic (EEG) signals to diagnose Parkinson's disease at an early stage. This paper aims to use EEG to capture neural correlates of dysfunction in PD patients and compare with the normal ones to determine whether a person has PD. The method is to preprocess the EEG dataset using MATLAB and EEGLAB and to analyze and classify the preprocessed data using MLP neural networks, which has good expressiveness and adaptability. Our dataset contains 25 sets of data with 11 healthy people and 14 Parkinson's Disease patients. Experiments show that the model has an average test accuracy of 96.8% and average test loss of 12.8%.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied and Computational EngineeringSame topicEEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesFrench-language works237,207