MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414207660 · doi:10.3390/ai6090230

Toward Reliable Models for Distinguishing Epileptic High-Frequency Oscillations (HFOs) from Non-HFO Events Using LSTM and Pre-Trained OWL-ViT Vision–Language Framework

2025· article· en· W4414207660 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAI · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
KeywordsSpurious relationshipGenerative grammarDeep learningProcess (computing)Key (lock)Pattern recognition (psychology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Over the past two decades, high-frequency oscillations (HFOs) between 80 and 500 Hz have emerged as valuable biomarkers for delineating and tracking epileptogenic brain networks. However, inspecting HFO events in lengthy EEG recordings remains a time-consuming visual process and mainly relies on experienced clinicians. Extensive recent research has emphasized the value of introducing deep learning (DL) and generative AI (GenAI) methods to automatically identify epileptic HFOs in iEEG signals. Owing to the ongoing issue of the noticeable incidence of spurious or false HFOs, a key question remains: which model is better able to distinguish epileptic HFOs from non-HFO events, such as artifacts and background noise? Methods: In this regard, our study addresses two main objectives: (i) proposing a novel HFO classification approach using a prompt engineering framework with OWL-ViT, a state-of-the-art large vision–language model designed for multimodal image understanding guided by optimized natural language prompts; and (ii) comparing a range of existing deep learning and generative models, including our proposed one. Main results: Notably, our quantitative and qualitative analysis demonstrated that the LSTM model achieved the highest classification accuracy of 99.16% among the time-series methods considered, while our proposed method consistently performed best among the different approaches based on time–frequency representation, achieving an accuracy of 99.07%. Conclusions and significance: The present study highlights the effectiveness of LSTM and prompted OWL-ViT models in distinguishing genuine HFOs from spurious non-HFO oscillations with respect to the gold-standard benchmark. These advancements constitute a promising step toward more reliable and efficient diagnostic tools for epilepsy.

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.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.824
Threshold uncertainty score0.816

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.300 · 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