Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38453969›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2024

Detecting cognitive traits and occupational proficiency using EEG and statistical inference.

Ilya Mikheev, Helen Steiner, Olga Martynova

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Ilya MikheevDepartment of Psychology, HSE University, Moscow, 101000, Russia. imikheev@hse.ru.
Helen SteinerInstitute of Higher Nervous Activity and Neurophysiology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, 117485, Russia.
Olga MartynovaInstitute of Higher Nervous Activity and Neurophysiology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, 117485, Russia.

Funding

National Research University Higher School of Economics Basic Research Program
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Machine learning (ML) is widely used in classification tasks aimed at detecting various cognitive states or neurological diseases using noninvasive electroencephalogram (EEG) time series. However, successfully detecting specific cognitive skills in a healthy population, independent of subject, remains challenging. This study compared the subject-independent classification performance of three different pipelines: supervised and Riemann projections with logistic regression and handcrafted power spectral features with light gradient boosting machine (LightGBM). 128-channel EEGs were recorded from 26 healthy volunteers while they solved arithmetic, logical, and verbal tasks. The participants were divided into two groups based on their higher education and occupation: specialists in mathematics and humanities. The balanced accuracy of the education type was significantly above chance for all pipelines: 0.84-0.89, 0.85-0.88, and 0.86-0.88 for each type of task, respectively. All three pipelines allowed us to distinguish mathematical proficiency based on learning experience with different trade-offs between performance and explainability. Our results suggest that ML approaches could also be effective for recognizing individual cognitive traits using EEG.

Indexed as

ElectroencephalographyMachine LearningCognitionHumansCognitive traitsEEGMachine learning

Identifiers

PMID38453969
PMCPMC10920811

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.