A spatial perturbation framework to validate implantation of the epileptogenic zone
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Stereo-electroencephalography (SEEG) is the gold standard to delineate surgical targets in focal drug-resistant epilepsy. SEEG uses electrodes placed directly into the brain to identify the seizure-onset zone (SOZ). However, its major constraint is limited brain coverage, potentially leading to misidentification of the 'true' SOZ. Here, we propose a framework to assess adequate SEEG sampling by coupling epileptic biomarkers with their spatial distribution and measuring the system's response to a perturbation of this coupling. We demonstrate that the system's response is strongest in well-sampled patients when virtually removing the measured SOZ. We then introduce the spatial perturbation map, a tool that enables qualitative assessment of the implantation coverage. Probability modelling reveals a higher likelihood of well-implanted SOZs in seizure-free patients or non-seizure free patients with incomplete SOZ resections, compared to non-seizure-free patients with complete resections. This highlights the framework's value in sparing patients from unsuccessful surgeries resulting from poor SEEG coverage.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".