Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42884285›Full record

ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2026

Gradient-Free Filter Importance for Structured Pruning of Compact EEG Networks.

Chu-Hui Lee, Chun-Ming Huang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. 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.

Chu-Hui LeeDepartment of Information Management, Chaoyang University of Technology, Taichung 413310, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0002-4197-2477
Chun-Ming HuangTaiwan Semiconductor Research Institute, National Institutes of Applied Research, Hsinchu 300091, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0001-7973-9112

Funding

National Science and Technology council NSTC-115-2221-E-324-016-.
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Deploying EEG classification networks on resource-constrained brain-computer interface (BCI) hardware motivates structured filter pruning, yet which importance criterion to trust in already-compact architectures is unclear. We present a leakage-free, physically materialized comparison of five filter-importance criteria-ablation-based structural sensitivity analysis (SSA), first-order Taylor, L1-norm, geometric median, and random-across four datasets, two paradigms (motor imagery and ERP), two architectures, multiple capacities, and with and without fine-tuning. On EEGNet, after fine-tuning, SSA and Taylor are statistically equivalent: pooled over the four datasets their accuracy difference falls within a ±1 percentage-point margin (TOST, p=0.01), and on ShallowConvNet SSA is never worse than Taylor; both criteria significantly outperform the weight-based and random ones. SSA's value is therefore not a more accurate ranking but its formulation: on a weight-quantized (8-bit) EEGNet, where the loss gradient-and hence Taylor-is undefined on the quantized graph used here, SSA is the best gradient-free criterion, significantly beating L1, geometric-median, and random pruning in aggregate-extending structured pruning to the quantized, gradient-free but editable deployment regime. We further show that the pruning schedule and fine-tuning matter more than the choice between strong criteria, and that training large then pruning with fine-tuning recovers accuracy equivalent to a directly trained smaller model. The results clarify where the importance criterion does and does not matter for compact EEG decoders.

Indexed as

ElectroencephalographySignal Processing, Computer-AssistedAlgorithmsBrain-Computer InterfacesHumansbrain–computer interfaceEEGEEGNetfilter importancegradient-free pruningmodel compressionquantizationstructured pruning

Identifiers

PMID42884285
PMCPMC13667559

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.