More Like this

1. Persistent cup product structures and related invariants

   https://doi.org/10.1007/s41468-023-00138-5  

   Mémoli, Facundo ; Stefanou, Anastasios ; Zhou, Ling ( October 2023 , Journal of Applied and Computational Topology)

   One-dimensional persistent homology is arguably the most important and heavily used computational tool in topological data analysis. Additional information can be extracted from datasets by studying multi-dimensional persistence modules and by utilizing cohomological ideas, e.g. the cohomological cup product. In this work, given a single parameter filtration, we investigate a certain 2-dimensional persistence module structure associated with persistent cohomology, where one parameter is the cup-length$$\ell \ge 0$$$\ell \ge 0$and the other is the filtration parameter. This new persistence structure, called thepersistent cup module, is induced by the cohomological cup product and adapted to the persistence setting. Furthermore, we show that this persistence structure is stable. By fixing the cup-length parameter$$\ell $$$\ell$, we obtain a 1-dimensional persistence module, called the persistent$$\ell $$$\ell$-cup module, and again show it is stable in the interleaving distance sense, and study their associated generalized persistence diagrams. In addition, we consider a generalized notion of apersistent invariant, which extends both therank invariant(also referred to aspersistent Betti number), Puuska’s rank invariant induced by epi-mono-preserving invariants of abelian categories, and the recently-definedpersistent cup-length invariant, and we establish their stability. This generalized notion of persistent invariant also enables us to lift the Lyusternik-Schnirelmann (LS) category of topological spaces to a novel stable persistent invariant of filtrations, called thepersistent LS-category invariant.

    

   more » « less
2. Move schedules: fast persistence computations in coarse dynamic settings

   https://doi.org/10.1007/s41468-023-00156-3  

   Piekenbrock, Matthew ; Perea, Jose A. ( January 2024 , Journal of Applied and Computational Topology)

   Matrix reduction is the standard procedure for computing the persistent homology of a filtered simplicial complex withmsimplices. Its output is a particular decomposition of the total boundary matrix, from which the persistence diagrams and generating cycles are derived. Persistence diagrams are known to vary continuously with respect to their input, motivating the study of their computation for time-varying filtered complexes. Computing persistence dynamically can be reduced to maintaining a valid decomposition under adjacent transpositions in the filtration order. Since there are$$O(m^2)$$$O\left(m^2\right)$such transpositions, this maintenance procedure exhibits limited scalability and is often too fine for many applications. We propose a coarser strategy for maintaining the decomposition over a 1-parameter family of filtrations. By reduction to a particular longest common subsequence problem, we show that the minimal number of decomposition updatesdcan be found in$$O(m \log \log m)$$$O(mloglogm)$time andO(m) space, and that the corresponding sequence of permutations—which we call aschedule—can be constructed in$$O(d m \log m)$$$O(dmlogm)$time. We also show that, in expectation, the storage needed to employ this strategy is actually sublinear inm. Exploiting this connection, we show experimentally that the decrease in operations to compute diagrams across a family of filtrations is proportional to the difference between the expected quadratic number of states and the proposed sublinear coarsening. Applications to video data, dynamic metric space data, and multiparameter persistence are also presented.

    

   more » « less
3. Curvature Sets Over Persistence Diagrams

   https://doi.org/10.1007/s00454-024-00634-0  

   Gómez, Mario ; Mémoli, Facundo ( April 2024 , Discrete & Computational Geometry)

   We study a family of invariants of compact metric spaces that combines the Curvature Sets defined by Gromov in the 1980 s with Vietoris–Rips Persistent Homology. For given integers$$k\ge 0$$$k\ge 0$and$$n\ge 1$$$n\ge 1$we consider the dimensionkVietoris–Rips persistence diagrams ofallsubsets of a given metric space with cardinality at mostn. We call these invariantspersistence setsand denote them as$${\textbf{D}}_{n,k}^{\textrm{VR}}$$$D_{n,k}^{\text{VR}}$. We first point out that this family encompasses the usual Vietoris–Rips diagrams. We then establish that (1) for certain range of values of the parametersnandk, computing these invariants is significantly more efficient than computing the usual Vietoris–Rips persistence diagrams, (2) these invariants have very good discriminating power and, in many cases, capture information that is imperceptible through standard Vietoris–Rips persistence diagrams, and (3) they enjoy stability properties analogous to those of the usual Vietoris–Rips persistence diagrams. We precisely characterize some of them in the case of spheres and surfaces with constant curvature using a generalization of Ptolemy’s inequality. We also identify a rich family of metric graphs for which$${\textbf{D}}_{4,1}^{\textrm{VR}}$$$D_{4,1}^{\text{VR}}$fully recovers their homotopy type by studying split-metric decompositions. Along the way we prove some useful properties of Vietoris–Rips persistence diagrams using Mayer–Vietoris sequences. These yield a geometric algorithm for computing the Vietoris–Rips persistence diagram of a spaceXwith cardinality$$2k+2$$$2k+2$with quadratic time complexity as opposed to the much higher cost incurred by the usual algebraic algorithms relying on matrix reduction.

    

   more » « less
4. Efficient Approximation of Multiparameter Persistence Modules

   David Loiseaux, Mathieu Carrière ( June 2022 , ArXivorg)

   Topological Data Analysis is a growing area of data science, which aims at computing and characterizing the geometry and topology of data sets, in order to produce useful descriptors for subsequent statistical and machine learning tasks. Its main computational tool is persistent homology, which amounts to track the topological changes in growing families of subsets of the data set itself, called filtrations, and encode them in an algebraic object, called persistence module. Even though algorithms and theoretical properties of modules are now well-known in the single-parameter case, that is, when there is only one filtration to study, much less is known in the multi-parameter case, where several filtrations are given at once. Though more complicated, the resulting persistence modules are usually richer and encode more information, making them better descriptors for data science. In this article, we present the first approximation scheme, which is based on fibered barcodes and exact matchings, two constructions that stem from the theory of single-parameter persistence, for computing and decomposing general multi-parameter persistence modules. Our algorithm has controlled complexity and running time, and works in arbitrary dimension, i.e., with an arbitrary number of filtrations. Moreover, when restricting to specific classes of multi-parameter persistence modules, namely the ones that can be decomposed into intervals, we establish theoretical results about the approximation error between our estimate and the true module in terms of interleaving distance. Finally, we present empirical evidence validating output quality and speed-up on several data sets. 

   more » « less
5. 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