Cited by 98EEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesAnomaly Detection Techniques and ApplicationsECG Monitoring and Analysis

Semi-Supervised Anomaly Detection for EEG Waveforms Using Deep Belief Nets

Wulsin, Drausin, Blanco, Justin, Mani, Ram, Litt, Brian·2010·2010 Ninth International Conference on Machine Learning and Applications

Abstract

Clinical electroencephalography (EEG) is routinely used to monitor brain function in critically ill patients, and specific EEG waveforms are recognized by clinicians as signatures of abnormal brain. These pathologic EEG waveforms, once detected, often necessitate accute clinincal interventions, but these events are typically rare, highly variable between patients, and often hard to separate from background, making them difficult to reliably detect. We show that Deep Belief Nets (DBNs), a type of multi-layer generative neural network, can be used effectively for such EEG anomaly detection. We compare this technique to the state-of-the-art, a one-class Support Vector Machine (SVM), showing that the DBN outperforms the SVM by the F1measure for our EEG dataset. We also show how the outputs of a DBN-based detector can be used to aid visualization of anomalies in large EEG data sets and propose a method for using DBNs to gain insight into which features of signals are characteristically anomalous. These findings show that Deep Belief Nets can facilitate human review of large amounts of clinical EEG as well as mining new EEG features that may be indicators of unusual activity.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/icmla.2010.71

Cites

15 of 15 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Most works try to learn the manifold of a single class representing normal data using an encoding-decoding scheme.

    “Most of the works try to learn the manifold of a single class representing normal data[7], using an encoding-decoding scheme, and their output is a classification of the input image as either normal or anomaly, while fewer works deal with the task to segment the local anomalous region in an image[8].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wulsin, D., Blanco, J., Mani, R., & Litt, B.
Affiliations
University of Pennsylvania (US)
Venue
2010 Ninth International Conference on Machine Learning and Applications
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2010-12
Pages
436-441
OpenAlex
W2171771147
Cited by
98
References
15
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
1.78
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
International Conference on Machine Learning and Applications (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institutes of Health
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Anomaly Detection Techniques and Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › ECG Monitoring and Analysis
Keywords
deep belief network, semi-supervised learning, one-class support vector machine, EEG feature extraction

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review