ArticleJournal of healthcare engineering2023
Extracting a Novel Emotional EEG Topographic Map Based on a Stacked Autoencoder Network.
Article in Journal of healthcare engineering, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Quantitative electroencephalography as a next-generation tool in neurodiagnostics: significance, clinical applications, and practical interpretative frameworks.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026Review
- Transformers in EEG Analysis: A Review of Architectures and Applications in Motor Imagery, Seizure, and Emotion Classification.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Decoding Imagined Speech from EEG Data: A Hybrid Deep Learning Approach to Capturing Spatial and Temporal Features.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Mud Ring Optimization Algorithm with Deep Learning Model for Disease Diagnosis on ECG Monitoring System.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Multi-channel EEG emotion recognition through residual graph attention neural network.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2023Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Emotion recognition based on brain signals has increasingly become attractive to evaluate human's internal emotional states. Conventional emotion recognition studies focus on developing machine learning and classifiers. However, most of these methods do not provide information on the involvement of different areas of the brain in emotions. Brain mapping is considered as one of the most distinguishing methods of showing the involvement of different areas of the brain in performing an activity. Most mapping techniques rely on projection and visualization of only one of the electroencephalogram (EEG) subband features onto brain regions. The present study aims to develop a new EEG-based brain mapping, which combines several features to provide more complete and useful information on a single map instead of common maps. In this study, the optimal combination of EEG features for each channel was extracted using a stacked autoencoder (SAE) network and visualizing a topographic map. Based on the research hypothesis, autoencoders can extract optimal features for quantitative EEG (QEEG) brain mapping. The DEAP EEG database was employed to extract topographic maps. The accuracy of image classifiers using the convolutional neural network (CNN) was used as a criterion for evaluating the distinction of the obtained maps from a stacked autoencoder topographic map (SAETM) method for different emotions. The average classification accuracy was obtained 0.8173 and 0.8037 in the valence and arousal dimensions, respectively. The extracted maps were also ranked by a team of experts compared to common maps. The results of quantitative and qualitative evaluation showed that the obtained map by SAETM has more information than conventional maps.
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.