More Like this

1. Daytime Data and LSTM Can Forecast Tomorrow's Stress, Health, and Happiness

   Umematsu, T ; Sano, A ; Picard, R ( January 2019 , 2019 41st Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine & Biology Society (EMBC))

   Accurately forecasting well-being may enable people to make desirable behavioral changes that could improve their future well-being. In this paper, we evaluate how well an automated model can forecast the next-day’s well-being (specifically focusing on stress, health, and happiness) from static models (support vector machine and logistic regression) and time-series models (long short-term memory neural network models (LSTM)) using the previous seven days of physiological, mobile phone, and behavioral survey data. We especially examine how using only a portion of the day’s data (e.g. just night-time, or just daytime) influences the forecasting accuracy. The results show that accuracy is improved, across every condition tested, by using an LSTM instead of using static models. We find that daytime-only physiology data from wearable sensors, using an LSTM, can provide an accurate forecast of tomorrow’s well-being using students’ daily life data (stress: 80.4%, health: 86.0%, and happiness: 79.1%), achieving the same accuracy as using data collected from around the clock. These findings are valuable steps toward developing a practical and convenient well-being forecasting system. 

   more » « less
2. Sea Ice Forecasting using Attention-based Ensemble LSTM

   Ali, Sahara ; Huang, Yiyi ; Huang, Xin ; Wang, Jianwu ( January 2021 , Proceedings of Tackling Climate Change with Machine Learning Workshop at International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML 2021))

   Accurately forecasting Arctic sea ice from sub- seasonal to seasonal scales has been a major scientific effort with fundamental challenges at play. In addition to physics-based earth system models, researchers have been applying multiple statistical and machine learning models for sea ice forecast- ing. Looking at the potential of data-driven sea ice forecasting, we propose an attention-based Long Short Term Memory (LSTM) ensemble method to predict monthly sea ice extent up to 1 month ahead. Using daily and monthly satellite retrieved sea ice data from NSIDC and atmospheric and oceanic variables from ERA5 reanalysis product for 39 years, we show that our multi-temporal ensemble method outperforms several baseline and recently proposed deep learning models. This will substantially improve our ability in predicting future Arctic sea ice changes, which is fundamental for forecasting transporting routes, resource development, coastal erosion, threats to Arctic coastal communities and wildlife. 

   more » « less
3. A Deep Learning-Based Real-time Seizure Detection System

   https://doi.org/10.1109/SPMB50085.2020.9353623  

   Shawki, N. ; Elseify, T. ; Cap, T. ; Shah, V. ; Obeid, I. ; Picone, J. ( December 2020 , Proceedings of the IEEE Signal Processing in Medicine and Biology Symposium (SPMB))

   Obeid, Iyad Selesnick (Ed.)

   Electroencephalography (EEG) is a popular clinical monitoring tool used for diagnosing brain-related disorders such as epilepsy [1]. As monitoring EEGs in a critical-care setting is an expensive and tedious task, there is a great interest in developing real-time EEG monitoring tools to improve patient care quality and efficiency [2]. However, clinicians require automatic seizure detection tools that provide decisions with at least 75% sensitivity and less than 1 false alarm (FA) per 24 hours [3]. Some commercial tools recently claim to reach such performance levels, including the Olympic Brainz Monitor [4] and Persyst 14 [5]. In this abstract, we describe our efforts to transform a high-performance offline seizure detection system [3] into a low latency real-time or online seizure detection system. An overview of the system is shown in Figure 1. The main difference between an online versus offline system is that an online system should always be causal and has minimum latency which is often defined by domain experts. The offline system, shown in Figure 2, uses two phases of deep learning models with postprocessing [3]. The channel-based long short term memory (LSTM) model (Phase 1 or P1) processes linear frequency cepstral coefficients (LFCC) [6] features from each EEG channel separately. We use the hypotheses generated by the P1 model and create additional features that carry information about the detected events and their confidence. The P2 model uses these additional features and the LFCC features to learn the temporal and spatial aspects of the EEG signals using a hybrid convolutional neural network (CNN) and LSTM model. Finally, Phase 3 aggregates the results from both P1 and P2 before applying a final postprocessing step. The online system implements Phase 1 by taking advantage of the Linux piping mechanism, multithreading techniques, and multi-core processors. To convert Phase 1 into an online system, we divide the system into five major modules: signal preprocessor, feature extractor, event decoder, postprocessor, and visualizer. The system reads 0.1-second frames from each EEG channel and sends them to the feature extractor and the visualizer. The feature extractor generates LFCC features in real time from the streaming EEG signal. Next, the system computes seizure and background probabilities using a channel-based LSTM model and applies a postprocessor to aggregate the detected events across channels. The system then displays the EEG signal and the decisions simultaneously using a visualization module. The online system uses C++, Python, TensorFlow, and PyQtGraph in its implementation. The online system accepts streamed EEG data sampled at 250 Hz as input. The system begins processing the EEG signal by applying a TCP montage [8]. Depending on the type of the montage, the EEG signal can have either 22 or 20 channels. To enable the online operation, we send 0.1-second (25 samples) length frames from each channel of the streamed EEG signal to the feature extractor and the visualizer. Feature extraction is performed sequentially on each channel. The signal preprocessor writes the sample frames into two streams to facilitate these modules. In the first stream, the feature extractor receives the signals using stdin. In parallel, as a second stream, the visualizer shares a user-defined file with the signal preprocessor. This user-defined file holds raw signal information as a buffer for the visualizer. The signal preprocessor writes into the file while the visualizer reads from it. Reading and writing into the same file poses a challenge. The visualizer can start reading while the signal preprocessor is writing into it. To resolve this issue, we utilize a file locking mechanism in the signal preprocessor and visualizer. Each of the processes temporarily locks the file, performs its operation, releases the lock, and tries to obtain the lock after a waiting period. The file locking mechanism ensures that only one process can access the file by prohibiting other processes from reading or writing while one process is modifying the file [9]. The feature extractor uses circular buffers to save 0.3 seconds or 75 samples from each channel for extracting 0.2-second or 50-sample long center-aligned windows. The module generates 8 absolute LFCC features where the zeroth cepstral coefficient is replaced by a temporal domain energy term. For extracting the rest of the features, three pipelines are used. The differential energy feature is calculated in a 0.9-second absolute feature window with a frame size of 0.1 seconds. The difference between the maximum and minimum temporal energy terms is calculated in this range. Then, the first derivative or the delta features are calculated using another 0.9-second window. Finally, the second derivative or delta-delta features are calculated using a 0.3-second window [6]. The differential energy for the delta-delta features is not included. In total, we extract 26 features from the raw sample windows which add 1.1 seconds of delay to the system. We used the Temple University Hospital Seizure Database (TUSZ) v1.2.1 for developing the online system [10]. The statistics for this dataset are shown in Table 1. A channel-based LSTM model was trained using the features derived from the train set using the online feature extractor module. A window-based normalization technique was applied to those features. In the offline model, we scale features by normalizing using the maximum absolute value of a channel [11] before applying a sliding window approach. Since the online system has access to a limited amount of data, we normalize based on the observed window. The model uses the feature vectors with a frame size of 1 second and a window size of 7 seconds. We evaluated the model using the offline P1 postprocessor to determine the efficacy of the delayed features and the window-based normalization technique. As shown by the results of experiments 1 and 4 in Table 2, these changes give us a comparable performance to the offline model. The online event decoder module utilizes this trained model for computing probabilities for the seizure and background classes. These posteriors are then postprocessed to remove spurious detections. The online postprocessor receives and saves 8 seconds of class posteriors in a buffer for further processing. It applies multiple heuristic filters (e.g., probability threshold) to make an overall decision by combining events across the channels. These filters evaluate the average confidence, the duration of a seizure, and the channels where the seizures were observed. The postprocessor delivers the label and confidence to the visualizer. The visualizer starts to display the signal as soon as it gets access to the signal file, as shown in Figure 1 using the “Signal File” and “Visualizer” blocks. Once the visualizer receives the label and confidence for the latest epoch from the postprocessor, it overlays the decision and color codes that epoch. The visualizer uses red for seizure with the label SEIZ and green for the background class with the label BCKG. Once the streaming finishes, the system saves three files: a signal file in which the sample frames are saved in the order they were streamed, a time segmented event (TSE) file with the overall decisions and confidences, and a hypotheses (HYP) file that saves the label and confidence for each epoch. The user can plot the signal and decisions using the signal and HYP files with only the visualizer by enabling appropriate options. For comparing the performance of different stages of development, we used the test set of TUSZ v1.2.1 database. It contains 1015 EEG records of varying duration. The any-overlap performance [12] of the overall system shown in Figure 2 is 40.29% sensitivity with 5.77 FAs per 24 hours. For comparison, the previous state-of-the-art model developed on this database performed at 30.71% sensitivity with 6.77 FAs per 24 hours [3]. The individual performances of the deep learning phases are as follows: Phase 1’s (P1) performance is 39.46% sensitivity and 11.62 FAs per 24 hours, and Phase 2 detects seizures with 41.16% sensitivity and 11.69 FAs per 24 hours. We trained an LSTM model with the delayed features and the window-based normalization technique for developing the online system. Using the offline decoder and postprocessor, the model performed at 36.23% sensitivity with 9.52 FAs per 24 hours. The trained model was then evaluated with the online modules. The current performance of the overall online system is 45.80% sensitivity with 28.14 FAs per 24 hours. Table 2 summarizes the performances of these systems. The performance of the online system deviates from the offline P1 model because the online postprocessor fails to combine the events as the seizure probability fluctuates during an event. The modules in the online system add a total of 11.1 seconds of delay for processing each second of the data, as shown in Figure 3. In practice, we also count the time for loading the model and starting the visualizer block. When we consider these facts, the system consumes 15 seconds to display the first hypothesis. The system detects seizure onsets with an average latency of 15 seconds. Implementing an automatic seizure detection model in real time is not trivial. We used a variety of techniques such as the file locking mechanism, multithreading, circular buffers, real-time event decoding, and signal-decision plotting to realize the system. A video demonstrating the system is available at: https://www.isip.piconepress.com/projects/nsf_pfi_tt/resources/videos/realtime_eeg_analysis/v2.5.1/video_2.5.1.mp4. The final conference submission will include a more detailed analysis of the online performance of each module. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Research reported in this publication was most recently supported by the National Science Foundation Partnership for Innovation award number IIP-1827565 and the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Universal Research Enhancement Program (PA CURE). Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official views of any of these organizations. REFERENCES [1] A. Craik, Y. He, and J. L. Contreras-Vidal, “Deep learning for electroencephalogram (EEG) classification tasks: a review,” J. Neural Eng., vol. 16, no. 3, p. 031001, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1088/1741-2552/ab0ab5. [2] A. C. Bridi, T. Q. Louro, and R. C. L. Da Silva, “Clinical Alarms in intensive care: implications of alarm fatigue for the safety of patients,” Rev. Lat. Am. Enfermagem, vol. 22, no. 6, p. 1034, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1590/0104-1169.3488.2513. [3] M. Golmohammadi, V. Shah, I. Obeid, and J. Picone, “Deep Learning Approaches for Automatic Seizure Detection from Scalp Electroencephalograms,” in Signal Processing in Medicine and Biology: Emerging Trends in Research and Applications, 1st ed., I. Obeid, I. Selesnick, and J. Picone, Eds. New York, New York, USA: Springer, 2020, pp. 233–274. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-36844-9_8. [4] “CFM Olympic Brainz Monitor.” [Online]. Available: https://newborncare.natus.com/products-services/newborn-care-products/newborn-brain-injury/cfm-olympic-brainz-monitor. [Accessed: 17-Jul-2020]. [5] M. L. Scheuer, S. B. Wilson, A. Antony, G. Ghearing, A. Urban, and A. I. Bagic, “Seizure Detection: Interreader Agreement and Detection Algorithm Assessments Using a Large Dataset,” J. Clin. Neurophysiol., 2020. https://doi.org/10.1097/WNP.0000000000000709. [6] A. Harati, M. Golmohammadi, S. Lopez, I. Obeid, and J. Picone, “Improved EEG Event Classification Using Differential Energy,” in Proceedings of the IEEE Signal Processing in Medicine and Biology Symposium, 2015, pp. 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1109/SPMB.2015.7405421. [7] V. Shah, C. Campbell, I. Obeid, and J. Picone, “Improved Spatio-Temporal Modeling in Automated Seizure Detection using Channel-Dependent Posteriors,” Neurocomputing, 2021. [8] W. Tatum, A. Husain, S. Benbadis, and P. Kaplan, Handbook of EEG Interpretation. New York City, New York, USA: Demos Medical Publishing, 2007. [9] D. P. Bovet and C. Marco, Understanding the Linux Kernel, 3rd ed. O’Reilly Media, Inc., 2005. https://www.oreilly.com/library/view/understanding-the-linux/0596005652/. [10] V. Shah et al., “The Temple University Hospital Seizure Detection Corpus,” Front. Neuroinform., vol. 12, pp. 1–6, 2018. https://doi.org/10.3389/fninf.2018.00083. [11] F. Pedregosa et al., “Scikit-learn: Machine Learning in Python,” J. Mach. Learn. Res., vol. 12, pp. 2825–2830, 2011. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/1953048.2078195. [12] J. Gotman, D. Flanagan, J. Zhang, and B. Rosenblatt, “Automatic seizure detection in the newborn: Methods and initial evaluation,” Electroencephalogr. Clin. Neurophysiol., vol. 103, no. 3, pp. 356–362, 1997. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0013-4694(97)00003-9. 

   more » « less
4. Phase-Aware CPU Workload Forecasting

   Alcorta, Erika S. ; Rama, Pranav ; Aswin, Ramachandran ; Gerstlauer, Andreas ( January 2021 , International Conference on Embedded Computer Systems: Architectures, Modeling and Simulation (SAMOS))

   null (Ed.)

   Predicting workload behavior during execution is essential for dynamic resource optimization of processor systems. Early studies used simple prediction algorithms such as a history tables. More recently, researchers have applied advanced machine learning regression techniques. Workload prediction can be cast as a time series forecasting problem. Time series forecasting is an active research area with recent advances that have not been studied in the context of workload prediction. In this paper, we first perform a comparative study of representative time series forecasting techniques to predict the dynamic workload of applications running on a CPU. We adapt state-of-the-art matrix profile and dynamic linear models (DLMs) not previously applied to workload prediction and compare them against traditional SVM and LSTM models that have been popular for handling non-stationary data. We find that all time series forecasting models struggle to predict abrupt workload changes. These changes occur because workloads go through phases, where prior work has studied workload phase detection, classification and prediction. We propose a novel approach that combines time series forecasting with phase prediction. We process each phase as a separate time series and train one forecasting model per phase. At runtime, forecasts from phase-specific models are selected and combined based on the predicted phase behavior. We apply our approach to forecasting of SPEC workloads running on a state-of-the-art Intel machine. Our results show that an LSTM-based phase-aware predictor can forecast workload CPI with less than 8% mean absolute error while reducing CPI error by more than 12% on average compared to a non-phase-aware approach. 

   more » « less
5. Investigating COVID-19’s Impact on Mental Health: Trend and Thematic Analysis of Reddit Users’ Discourse

   https://doi.org/10.2196/46867  

   Zhu, Jianfeng ; Yalamanchi, Neha ; Jin, Ruoming ; Kenne, Deric R ; Phan, NhatHai ( January 2023 , Journal of Medical Internet Research)

   The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in heightened levels of depression, anxiety, and other mental health issues due to sudden changes in daily life, such as economic stress, social isolation, and educational irregularity. Accurately assessing emotional and behavioral changes in response to the pandemic can be challenging, but it is essential to understand the evolving emotions, themes, and discussions surrounding the impact of COVID-19 on mental health.

   This study aims to understand the evolving emotions and themes associated with the impact of COVID-19 on mental health support groups (eg, r/Depression and r/Anxiety) on Reddit (Reddit Inc) during the initial phase and after the peak of the pandemic using natural language processing techniques and statistical methods.

   This study used data from the r/Depression and r/Anxiety Reddit communities, which consisted of posts contributed by 351,409 distinct users over a period spanning from 2019 to 2022. Topic modeling and Word2Vec embedding models were used to identify key terms associated with the targeted themes within the data set. A range of trend and thematic analysis techniques, including time-to-event analysis, heat map analysis, factor analysis, regression analysis, and k-means clustering analysis, were used to analyze the data.

   The time-to-event analysis revealed that the first 28 days following a major event could be considered a critical window for mental health concerns to become more prominent. The theme trend analysis revealed key themes such as economic stress, social stress, suicide, and substance use, with varying trends and impacts in each community. The factor analysis highlighted pandemic-related stress, economic concerns, and social factors as primary themes during the analyzed period. Regression analysis showed that economic stress consistently demonstrated the strongest association with the suicide theme, whereas the substance theme had a notable association in both data sets. Finally, the k-means clustering analysis showed that in r/Depression, the number of posts related to the “depression, anxiety, and medication” cluster decreased after 2020, whereas the “social relationships and friendship” cluster showed a steady decrease. In r/Anxiety, the “general anxiety and feelings of unease” cluster peaked in April 2020 and remained high, whereas the “physical symptoms of anxiety” cluster showed a slight increase.

   This study sheds light on the impact of COVID-19 on mental health and the related themes discussed in 2 web-based communities during the pandemic. The results offer valuable insights for developing targeted interventions and policies to support individuals and communities in similar crises.

    

   more » « less