ArticleScientific reports2026
Decoding concealed information using multimodal neurophysiological signals.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Detecting concealed information is a critical challenge in forensic investigations, security screening, and cognitive neuroscience. Conventional approaches using the concealed information test primarily rely on binary classification, distinguishing between recognized (concealed) and unrecognized (neutral) stimuli. This limits interpretability and fails to reveal the nature of the concealed knowledge. In this pilot study, we present a novel multimodal framework that moves beyond binary detection by decoding the category of concealed information into object, person, or place based on neurophysiological signals recorded during a concealed information test. High density electroencephalography and physiological signals, including skin temperature, galvanic skin response, and plethysmogram, were simultaneously recorded from ten subjects as they viewed visual stimuli representing these three categories. Temporal and spectral features were extracted from both modalities, followed by machine learning based multimodal fusion for classification. The proposed framework achieved an overall accuracy of 94.2%, significantly outperforming unimodal EEG (73%) and physiological (54.2%) baselines. Further analysis showed that similar decoding performance can be achieved using as few as eight strategically selected EEG electrodes, supporting the feasibility of lightweight, wearable implementations. The most informative electrodes were located over prefrontal and frontocentral regions, aligning with cognitive processes related to attention, recognition, and deception. These findings demonstrate that neurophysiological signals enables not only the detection of concealed knowledge but also the identification of the type of hidden information. The integration of EEG and physiological signals enhances both sensitivity and interpretability by capturing complementary aspects of cognitive and affective processing during recognition. By enhancing the CIT paradigm from binary recognition toward semantic decoding, this pilot study advances the development of interpretable deception detection systems and bridges laboratory neuroscience with real world forensic applications.
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.