MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408177736 · doi:10.1088/1741-2552/adbd77

Detection of freely moving thoughts using SVM and EEG signals

2025· article· en· W4408177736 on OpenAlexaff
Sairamya Nanjappan Jothiraj, Caitlin Mills, Zachary C. Irving, Julia W. Y. Kam

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neural Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectroencephalographySupport vector machineComputer scienceArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)PsychologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Objective. Freely moving thought is a type of thinking that shifts from one topic to another without any overarching direction or aim. The ability to detect when freely moving thought occurs may help us promote its beneficial outcomes, such as for creative thinking and positive mood. Thus far, no studies have used machine learning to detect freely moving thought on the basis of ‘objective’ (e.g. neural or behavioral) data. Approach. Our study addresses this gap, using event-related potential (ERP) and spectral features of electroencephalogram (EEG) signals as well as behavioral measures during a simple attention task and machine learning to detect freely moving thought. EEG features were first examined with both inter-subject and intra-subject strategies. Specifically, the statistical and entropy features of the P3 ERP and alpha spectral measures were entered as inputs to the support vector machine. The best combination of EEG features achieving higher classification performance in both strategies were then selected to combine with behavioral features to further enhance classification performance. Main results. Our best performing model has a Matthew’s correlation coefficient and area under the curve of 0.3105 and 0.6665 for inter-subject models and 0.2815 and 0.6407 for intra-subject models respectively. Significance. The above chance level performance in both strategies using EEG and behavioral features shows great promise for machine learning approaches to detect freely moving thought and highlights their potential for real-time prediction in the real world. This has important implications for enhancing creative processes and mood associated with freely moving thought.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.187
Threshold uncertainty score0.286

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neural EngineeringSame topicEEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesFrench-language works237,207