ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Leveraging Multiple Distinct EEG Training Sessions for Improvement of Spectral-Based Biometric Verification Results.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A PRISMA-based systematic review on advances in identity recognition and authentication using human biometric signals (2018-2023).Biomedical engineering online · 2026Pooled it
- Extraction of brainprint by means of autoencoder with attention mechanism.Frontiers in computational neuroscience · 2026Article
- EEG-Based Personal Identification by Special Design Domain-Adaptive Autoencoder.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Acquisition and processing of Motor Imagery and Motor Execution Dataset (MIMED) for six movement activities.Data in brief · 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
Most studies on EEG-based biometry recognition report results based on signal databases, with a limited number of recorded EEG sessions using the same single EEG recording for both training and testing a proposed model. However, the EEG signal is highly vulnerable to interferences, electrode placement, and temporary conditions, which can lead to overestimated assessments of the considered methods. Our study examined how different numbers of distinct recording sessions used as training sessions would affect EEG-based verification. We analyzed the original data from 29 participants with 20 distinct recorded sessions each, as well as 23 additional impostors with only one session each. We applied raw coefficients of power spectral density estimate, and the coefficients of power spectral density estimate converted to the decibel scale, as the input to a shallow neural network. Our study showed that the variance introduced by multiple recording sessions affects sensitivity. We also showed that increasing the number of sessions above eight did not improve the results under our conditions. For 15 training sessions, the achieved accuracy was 96.7 ± 4.2%, and for eight training sessions and 12 test sessions, it was 94.9 ± 4.6%. For 15 training sessions, the rate of successful impostor attacks over all attack attempts was 3.1 ± 2.2%, but this number was not significantly different from using six recording sessions for training. Our findings indicate the need to include data from multiple recording sessions in EEG-based recognition for training, and that increasing the number of test sessions did not significantly affect the obtained results. Although the presented results are for the resting-state, they may serve as a baseline for other paradigms.
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.