Generative AI with WGAN-GP for boosting seizure detection accuracy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Imbalanced datasets pose challenges for developing accurate seizure detection systems based on electroencephalogram (EEG) data. Generative AI techniques may help augment minority class data to facilitate automatic epileptic seizure detection. New method: This study investigates the impact of various data augmentation (DA) approaches, including Wasserstein Generative Adversarial Network with Gradient Penalty (WGAN-GP), Vanilla GAN, Conditional GAN (CGAN), and Cramer GAN, on classification performance with Random Forest models. The best-performing GAN variant, WGAN-GP, was then integrated with a bidirectional Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) architecture and compared against traditional and synthetic oversampling methods. Results: The evaluation of different GAN variants for data augmentation with Random Forest classifiers identified WGAN-GP as the most effective approach. The integration of WGAN-GP with bidirectional LSTM yielded substantial performance improvements, outperforming traditional oversampling methods and achieving an accuracy of 91.73% on the augmented data, compared to 86% accuracy on real data without augmentation. Comparison with existing methods: The proposed generative AI approach combining WGAN-GP and recurrent neural network models outperforms comparative synthetic oversampling methods on metrics relevant for reliable seizure detection from imbalanced EEG datasets. Conclusions: Incorporating the WGAN-GP generative AI technique for data augmentation and integrating it with bidirectional LSTM elevates seizure detection accuracy for imbalanced EEG datasets, surpassing the performance of traditional oversampling and class weight adjustment methods. This approach shows promise for improving epilepsy monitoring and management through enhanced automated detection system effectiveness.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".