MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412870806 · doi:10.24908/pceea.2025.19654

EEG Functional Connectivity Reveals Neural Mechanisms of Design Creativity in Engineering Students

2025· article· en· W4412870806 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Morteza Zangeneh Soroush, Yong Zeng

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCreativity in Education and Neuroscience
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaPolytechnique Montréal
KeywordsCreativityFunctional connectivityElectroencephalographyPsychologyCognitive scienceCognitive psychologyComputer scienceNeuroscienceSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Design creativity is essential in engineering education, fostering innovation. This study examines its neural mechanisms across four cognitive states—idea generation (IDG), idea evolution (IDE), idea rating (IDR), and rest (RST). We hypothesize that brain dynamics differ across these states and can be analyzed using functional connectivity. EEG signals were recorded in loosely controlled experiments and analyzed via the weighted phase lag index (wPLI). Strength and Betweenness were extracted as graph-based features and evaluated through statistical analyses and classification models. Results showed significant features – Strength features in the left hemisphere (central, parietal, and temporal lobes) acting as key hubs, while Betweenness in the right hemisphere (frontal and central lobes) indicated network information flow. The proposed method achieved high classification accuracy (≥87%), with SVM (~92%) outperforming MLP and KNN. This computationally efficient approach advances neural studies of design creativity, offering insights into cognitive processes and real-world applications such as brain-computer interfaces.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)Same topicCreativity in Education and NeuroscienceFrench-language works237,207