MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400056735 · doi:10.3389/fnrgo.2024.1358660

Shredding artifacts: extracting brain activity in EEG from extreme artifacts during skateboarding using ASR and ICA

2024· article· en· W4400056735 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel E. Callan, Juan Jesus Torre–Tresols, Jamie Laguerta, Shin Ishii

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Neuroergonomics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectroencephalographyIndependent component analysisBrain activity and meditationPsychologyPattern recognition (psychology)Computer scienceArtificial intelligenceNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: To understand brain function in natural real-world settings, it is crucial to acquire brain activity data in noisy environments with diverse artifacts. Electroencephalography (EEG), while susceptible to environmental and physiological artifacts, can be cleaned using advanced signal processing techniques like Artifact Subspace Reconstruction (ASR) and Independent Component Analysis (ICA). This study aims to demonstrate that ASR and ICA can effectively extract brain activity from the substantial artifacts occurring while skateboarding on a half-pipe ramp. Methods: A dual-task paradigm was used, where subjects were presented with auditory stimuli during skateboarding and rest conditions. The effectiveness of ASR and ICA in cleaning artifacts was evaluated using a support vector machine to classify the presence or absence of a sound stimulus in single-trial EEG data. The study evaluated the effectiveness of ASR and ICA in artifact cleaning using five different pipelines: (1) Minimal cleaning (bandpass filtering), (2) ASR only, (3) ICA only, (4) ICA followed by ASR (ICAASR), and (5) ASR preceding ICA (ASRICA). Three skateboarders participated in the experiment. Results: Results showed that all ICA-containing pipelines, especially ASRICA (69%, 68%, 63%), outperformed minimal cleaning (55%, 52%, 50%) in single-trial classification during skateboarding. The ASRICA pipeline performed significantly better than other pipelines containing ICA for two of the three subjects, with no other pipeline performing better than ASRICA. The superior performance of ASRICA likely results from ASR removing non-stationary artifacts, enhancing ICA decomposition. Evidenced by ASRICA identifying more brain components via ICLabel than ICA alone or ICAASR for all subjects. For the rest condition, with fewer artifacts, the ASRICA pipeline (71%, 82%, 75%) showed slight improvement over minimal cleaning (73%, 70%, 72%), performing significantly better for two subjects. Discussion: This study demonstrates that ASRICA can effectively clean artifacts to extract single-trial brain activity during skateboarding. These findings affirm the feasibility of recording brain activity during physically demanding tasks involving substantial body movement, laying the groundwork for future research into the neural processes governing complex and coordinated body movements.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations8
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in NeuroergonomicsSame topicEEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesFrench-language works237,207