1 / 14

A Stochastic framework for evaluating seizure prediction algorithm using HMM

A Stochastic framework for evaluating seizure prediction algorithm using HMM. Wong, Gardner, Krieger, Litt (2006). Zack Dvey-Aharon, March 2008. Agenda. What EEG is and how it may help to indicate seizures Past work and the goal of study HMM: A short Introduction

redford
Download Presentation

A Stochastic framework for evaluating seizure prediction algorithm using HMM

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. A Stochastic framework for evaluating seizure prediction algorithm using HMM Wong, Gardner, Krieger, Litt (2006) Zack Dvey-Aharon, March 2008

  2. Agenda • What EEG is and how it may help to indicate seizures • Past work and the goal of study • HMM: A short Introduction • Model used in study and it’s restrictions • Methodology overview • Results and remarks • Criticism • Questions

  3. What EEG is and how it may help to indicate seizures (1) • EEG = (or Electroencephalography) is the measurement of electrical activity produced by the brain as recorded from electrodes placed on the scalp.

  4. What EEG is and how it may help to indicate seizures (2) • Seizure (epilepsy)

  5. What EEG is and how it may help to indicate seizures (3) • In a case of a seizure, it is noticed in some of the areas\channel of the EEG signal. • In all of the cases there are pre-seizure spikes that appear very clearly. • Spikes and long disturbances can occur often even in a totally healthy patient.

  6. Past work and the goal of study • As we have seen, there are medical studies stating spikes appear differently before seizures, and that these can be therefore used for a predictive analysis. • No method convincingly demonstrated prospective seizure prediction sufficient. • The problematic tradeoff: Accuracy Vs. low FPR. • Writers claim that current top methods appear in research are (1) based on study design adding many assumptions and (2) Address only extreme cases with high rate of seizures, failing to handle FPR.

  7. HMM: A short Introduction • HMM = Hidden Markov Models. These mathematical models are based on the Markovian Assumption: • (1) The observations are an outcome to a “hidden-state”, one of states in a chain that represent the state of the object. • (2) The probability to change from state to another depends only on the last (N) past transitions. (N-Markovian assumption) • (3) observations are stochastically distributed according to the current state.

  8. HMM: A short Introduction (2) • HMM parameters: • X – states of the model • Y – observations • A – a matrix that represents transition probabilities • B – a matrix that represent emission probabilities

  9. Model used in study and it’s restrictions • At first we train a three-state HMM, with states 1, 2, and 3 denoting the baseline, detected, and seizure states, respectively. • Model Restrictions: (1) aii = 1 - 1/Di * (2) a13 < a23 (3) b11 > b12 , b21 < b22 (4) b33 = 1 , b13 = b23 = b31 = b32 = 0 * where Di is the average duration of state i

  10. Methodology overview • Training prediction algorithm using raw EEG signal, and labeled data of an expert states observation are added to train HMM network • Model is trained, and using the Viterbi algorithm, the most probable state sequence is found, clearing “transition” noise • Then the statistical association between seizure & detected states can be measured in order to validate the hypothesis.

  11. Results and remarks (1) • Algorithm shows two major achievements: • (1) Demonstrating on a specific prediction algorithm (of Gardner, 2006), HMM showed output can be smoother too lower FPR in more than 70% • (2) Using the algorithm as a post processing tool can increase detection ratio (demonstrated against that specific prediction algorithm, 17/29 against 5/29). Red arrows: False positives Black arrow: False negative

  12. Results and remarks (2) On Top: Global minima of the HMM training process On Bottom: How using the Model can help drop false-positives

  13. Criticism • Enthusiasm caused writers to lose focus, from evaluating prediction algorithms to improving them. • All experiments were based on evaluating and improving one specific algorithm, which is not explained and in any aspect proved to be a very weak predictor. • Model definition can be improved very easily, adding more restrictions (as proved from B matrix results, for example). • The model also contains statistic estimations, against statement that methodology is free from study designs and data assumptions.

  14. Questions ?

More Related