Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40285226›Full record

ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2025

Development of a Deep-Learning-Based Computerized Scoring Algorithm.

Junghyun Heo, Layoung Hwang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. 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

2 authors.

Junghyun HeoDepartment of AI Design, College of Design, Kookmin University, Seoul 02707, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-0466-8860
Layoung HwangDepartment of Digital Healthcare, Yonsei University, Wonju 26493, Republic of Korea.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

During polygraph tests, the examiner evaluates physiological responses recorded on a chart to identify deception. Generally, this evaluation involves a numerical scoring system. However, biases related to politics, region, and religion, as well as personal factors such as fatigue and stress, can lead to inaccuracies in the examiner's judgment. To solve these problems, computerized scoring systems (CSSs) that automatically analyze charts have been introduced, aiming to reduce human error. Conventional CSS models, which rely on linear classifiers, struggle with the nonlinear nature of biological signals, resulting in poor performance. Therefore, it is crucial to incorporate deep learning structures such as deep neural networks, which account for the nonlinearity of bio-signals, to enhance effectiveness of CSSs. This paper introduces a Korean computerized scoring system that leverages a deep neural network, which was developed to mitigate the subjective bias of polygraph examiners and to obtain high-accuracy results by considering the nonlinearity of bio-signals. The performance of the developed algorithm was evaluated, demonstrating recall, precision, and F1 scores of 0.9681 ± 0.0314, 0.9700 ± 0.0321, and 0.9683 ± 0.0171, respectively. These results suggested a significant improvement in CSS performance over conventional systems that depend on linear classifiers.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsDeep LearningHumansNeural Networks, Computerbio-signalscomputerized scoring algorithmdeep learningdeep neural networklie detectionpolygraph

Identifiers

PMID40285226
PMCPMC12031579

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.