MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401417448 · doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1012376

Convolutional neural networks can identify brain interactions involved in decoding spatial auditory attention

2024· article· en· W4401417448 on OpenAlexaff
Keyvan Mahjoory, Andreas Bahmer, Molly J. Henry

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS Computational Biology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersHORIZON EUROPE European Research CouncilMax-Planck-Gesellschaft
KeywordsComputer scienceDecoding methodsElectroencephalographyConvolutional neural networkArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)Speech recognitionBrain activity and meditationTask (project management)PsychologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Human listeners have the ability to direct their attention to a single speaker in a multi-talker environment. The neural correlates of selective attention can be decoded from a single trial of electroencephalography (EEG) data. In this study, leveraging the source-reconstructed and anatomically-resolved EEG data as inputs, we sought to employ CNN as an interpretable model to uncover task-specific interactions between brain regions, rather than simply to utilize it as a black box decoder. To this end, our CNN model was specifically designed to learn pairwise interaction representations for 10 cortical regions from five-second inputs. By exclusively utilizing these features for decoding, our model was able to attain a median accuracy of 77.56% for within-participant and 65.14% for cross-participant classification. Through ablation analysis together with dissecting the features of the models and applying cluster analysis, we were able to discern the presence of alpha-band-dominated inter-hemisphere interactions, as well as alpha- and beta-band dominant interactions that were either hemisphere-specific or were characterized by a contrasting pattern between the right and left hemispheres. These interactions were more pronounced in parietal and central regions for within-participant decoding, but in parietal, central, and partly frontal regions for cross-participant decoding. These findings demonstrate that our CNN model can effectively utilize features known to be important in auditory attention tasks and suggest that the application of domain knowledge inspired CNNs on source-reconstructed EEG data can offer a novel computational framework for studying task-relevant brain interactions.

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)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.275 · 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

Citations9
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS Computational BiologySame topicEEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesFrench-language works237,207