ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Decoding Brain Signals from Rapid-Event EEG for Visual Analysis Using Deep Learning.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Leveraging Cross-Subject Transfer Learning and Signal Augmentation for Enhanced RGB Color Decoding from EEG Data.Brain sciences · 2026Article
- Decoding visual object recognition from EEG signals.PloS one · 2026Article
- Human-Centric Spatial Cognition Detecting System Based on Drivers' Electroencephalogram Signals for Autonomous Driving.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Time-frequency feature calculation of multi-stage audiovisual neural processing via electroencephalogram microstates.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The perception and recognition of objects around us empower environmental interaction. Harnessing the brain's signals to achieve this objective has consistently posed difficulties. Researchers are exploring whether the poor accuracy in this field is a result of the design of the temporal stimulation (block versus rapid event) or the inherent complexity of electroencephalogram (EEG) signals. Decoding perceptive signal responses in subjects has become increasingly complex due to high noise levels and the complex nature of brain activities. EEG signals have high temporal resolution and are non-stationary signals, i.e., their mean and variance vary overtime. This study aims to develop a deep learning model for the decoding of subjects' responses to rapid-event visual stimuli and highlights the major factors that contribute to low accuracy in the EEG visual classification task.The proposed multi-class, multi-channel model integrates feature fusion to handle complex, non-stationary signals. This model is applied to the largest publicly available EEG dataset for visual classification consisting of 40 object classes, with 1000 images in each class. Contemporary state-of-the-art studies in this area investigating a large number of object classes have achieved a maximum accuracy of 17.6%. In contrast, our approach, which integrates Multi-Class, Multi-Channel Feature Fusion (MCCFF), achieves a classification accuracy of 33.17% for 40 classes. These results demonstrate the potential of EEG signals in advancing EEG visual classification and offering potential for future applications in visual machine models.
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.