MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4398136229 · doi:10.1002/eng2.12918

Deep learning‐based seizure prediction using EEG signals: A comparative analysis of classification methods on the CHB‐MIT dataset

2024· article· en· W4398136229 on OpenAlexaff
Ali Esmaeilpour, Shaghayegh Shahiri Tabarestani, Alireza Niazi

Bibliographic record

VenueEngineering Reports · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectroencephalographyArtificial intelligenceComputer sciencePattern recognition (psychology)Machine learningSpeech recognitionPsychologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Epilepsy is a brain disorder that causes patients to have multiple seizures. About 30% of patients with epilepsy are not treated with medication or surgery. The abnormal activity of brain before occurring of a seizure (about a few minutes before a seizure occurs) are known as the preictal area. Therefore, if we can predict this state, we can control possible seizures by using appropriate medications. In this study, we present a method for predicting epileptic seizures using electroencephalogram (EEG) signals. The method can identify the preictal region that occurs before the onset of seizures. In our proposed method, first the noise removal of EEG signals is performed, and then the necessary features are extracted using a convolution neural network. Finally, we use the feature vectors in order to train multiple classifiers, fully connected layer, random forest, and support vector machines with linear kernel. Additionally, we apply maximum voting, which is an ensemble method, to classify preictal segments from interictal ones. In this study, using EEG signals of patients from CHB‐MIT dataset, we were able to achieve sensitivity of 90.76%.

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)0.002
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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.276 · 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

Citations26
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEngineering ReportsSame topicEEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesFrench-language works237,207