Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37663037›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in computational neuroscience2023

Towards best practice of interpreting deep learning models for EEG-based brain computer interfaces.

Jian Cui, Liqiang Yuan, Zhaoxiang Wang, Ruilin Li, Tianzi Jiang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in computational neuroscience, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Jian CuiResearch Center for Augmented Intelligence, Research Institute of Artificial Intelligence, Zhejiang Lab, Hangzhou, China.
Liqiang YuanSchool of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore.
Zhaoxiang WangResearch Center for Augmented Intelligence, Research Institute of Artificial Intelligence, Zhejiang Lab, Hangzhou, China.
Ruilin LiSchool of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore.
Tianzi JiangResearch Center for Augmented Intelligence, Research Institute of Artificial Intelligence, Zhejiang Lab, Hangzhou, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: As deep learning has achieved state-of-the-art performance for many tasks of EEG-based BCI, many efforts have been made in recent years trying to understand what have been learned by the models. This is commonly done by generating a heatmap indicating to which extent each pixel of the input contributes to the final classification for a trained model. Despite the wide use, it is not yet understood to which extent the obtained interpretation results can be trusted and how accurate they can reflect the model decisions. Methods: We conduct studies to quantitatively evaluate seven different deep interpretation techniques across different models and datasets for EEG-based BCI. Results: The results reveal the importance of selecting a proper interpretation technique as the initial step. In addition, we also find that the quality of the interpretation results is inconsistent for individual samples despite when a method with an overall good performance is used. Many factors, including model structure and dataset types, could potentially affect the quality of the interpretation results. Discussion: Based on the observations, we propose a set of procedures that allow the interpretation results to be presented in an understandable and trusted way. We illustrate the usefulness of our method for EEG-based BCI with instances selected from different scenarios.

Indexed as

brain-computer interface (BCI)convolutional neural networkdeep learning interpretabilityelectroencephalography (EEG)layer-wise relevance propagation (LRP)

Identifiers

PMID37663037
PMCPMC10470463

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.