Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41346402›Full record

ArticleImaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)2025

What does my network learn? Assessing interpretability of deep learning for EEG.

Pinar Göktepe-Kavis, Florence M Aellen, Sigurd L Alnes, Athina Tzovara

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.), 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

4 authors.

Pinar Göktepe-KavisInstitute of Computer Science, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5582-729X
Florence M AellenInstitute of Computer Science, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Sigurd L AlnesInstitute of Computer Science, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Athina TzovaraInstitute of Computer Science, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Electrophysiological studies are profiting from multivariate pattern analysis methods. However, these mostly rely on machine-learning algorithms that assume consistent response latencies across trials and individuals. Deep learning provides high performance without such assumptions, but often at the cost of interpretability of learned features. Here, we evaluated how the interpretability of deep learning for electroencephalography (EEG) data is affected by preprocessing choices, the network's architecture, and the way the learned features are extracted and visualized. We trained two convolutional neural networks (CNN): (1) ResNet, a residual network, and (2) EEGNet, which leverages spatiotemporal properties of EEG. We trained these networks to decode single-trial EEG responses to three different visual stimuli (visual dataset) and to the presence of a sound (auditory dataset). We then extracted and visualized learned features with two gradient-based techniques: saliency and gradient-weighted activation maps (GradCam). Results showed that EEGNet and ResNet performed at a similar level. Yet, visualization of learned features revealed that different architectures learn different aspects of the data. Between the two CNNs, EEGNet features had a higher similarity to the EEG data than ResNet features. Moreover, the latency and distribution of important electrodes varied depending on the visualization technique. GradCam provided features more similar to EEG data than those with saliency, emphasizing the impact of the feature extraction method on interpretability. Our results call for careful consideration of network architecture and feature visualization methods to improve interpretability, which is a crucial step for advancing the use of deep learning in EEG research.

Indexed as

decodingdeep learningEEGfeature visualizationinterpretability

Identifiers

PMID41346402
PMCPMC12673218

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.