ArticleBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Assessment of Model Accuracy in Eyes Open and Closed EEG Data: Effect of Data Pre-Processing and Validation Methods.
Article in Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Passive Brain-Computer Interface Using Textile-Based Electroencephalography.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Machine Learning Approaches to Evaluate EEG Correlates of Relaxation Between Supine and Sitting Postures in Eyes-closed Condition.Annals of neurosciences · 2025Article
- Exploring Convolutional Neural Network Architectures for EEG Feature Extraction.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Eyes open and eyes closed data is often used to validate novel human brain activity classification methods. The cross-validation of models trained on minimally preprocessed data is frequently utilized, regardless of electroencephalography data comprised of data resulting from muscle activity and environmental noise, affecting classification accuracy. Moreover, electroencephalography data of a single subject is often divided into smaller parts, due to limited availability of large datasets. The most frequently used method for model validation is cross-validation, even though the results may be affected by overfitting to the specifics of brain activity of limited subjects. To test the effects of preprocessing and classifier validation on classification accuracy, we tested fourteen classification algorithms implemented in WEKA and MATLAB, tested on comprehensively and simply preprocessed electroencephalography data. Hold-out and cross-validation were used to compare the classification accuracy of eyes open and closed data. The data of 50 subjects, with four minutes of data with eyes closed and open each was used. The algorithms trained on simply preprocessed data were superior to the ones trained on comprehensively preprocessed data in cross-validation testing. The reverse was true when hold-out accuracy was examined. Significant increases in hold-out accuracy were observed if the data of different subjects was not strictly separated between the test and training datasets, showing the presence of overfitting. The results show that comprehensive data preprocessing can be advantageous for subject invariant classification, while higher subject-specific accuracy can be attained with simple preprocessing. Researchers should thus state the final intended use of their classifier.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.