科研速览 · Science Skim继续刷下去 · Keep skimming →
◇ arXiv2026-09-25· eess.SP

Automated Artifact Removal in EEG Age Prediction: A systematic comparison

Davoud Hajhassani, Paul-Adrien Graignic, Bruno Aristimunha, Apolline Mellot, Tom Mariani, Clément Nober, Bruna J. Lopes, Léo Burgund, Lionel Kusch, Thomas Semah, Arnault H. Caillet

原始摘要(英文原文)· Original abstract
Automated EEG artifact removal may improve downstream analysis but can also alter predictive information. We benchmarked nine automated artifact removal methods against a common no-artifact-removal baseline for cross-dataset EEG age prediction. We introduce Signal Quality Index (SQI)-guided GEDAI, which leverages local signal-quality assessment to restrict correction to the channel--epoch pairs requiring intervention. Three deep neural architectures were trained on TUEG and evaluated without target-domain fitting on ds005385, LEMON, and TDBRAIN. Across this setting, GEDAI and SQI-guided GEDAI were the only methods with consistent gains over baseline in age prediction performance across all datasets and architectures ($Δ$MAE $=-0.77/-0.64$ years, $ΔR^2=+0.083/+0.072$, respectively). The remaining methods were neutral or detrimental on average ($Δ$MAE $=+0.22\pm0.16$ years, $ΔR^2=-0.023\pm0.016$ across methods). The two GEDAI-based methods achieved closely matched performance, while SQI guidance reduced the median modification ratio from $74.78\%$ to $42.80\%$. These findings show that curation benefits are method-dependent and establish SQI guidance as a more selective operating point, leaving more of the original EEG unchanged and limiting the potential loss of neural activity while retaining most of GEDAI's predictive benefit.
读原文 · Read the paper ↗

AI 追问PRO

登录后使用 AI 追问

讨论区

登录后参与讨论

相关论文 · Related

Automated Artifact Removal in EEG Age Prediction: A systematic comparison — 科研速览 Science Skim