More Like this

1. 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
2. Earth Imagery Segmentation on Terrain Surface with Limited Training Labels: A Semi-supervised Approach based on Physics-Guided Graph Co-Training

   https://doi.org/10.1145/3481043  

   He, Wenchong ; Sainju, Arpan Man ; Jiang, Zhe ; Yan, Da ; Zhou, Yang ( April 2022 , ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology)

   Given earth imagery with spectral features on a terrain surface, this paper studies surface segmentation based on both explanatory features and surface topology. The problem is important in many spatial and spatiotemporal applications such as flood extent mapping in hydrology. The problem is uniquely challenging for several reasons: first, the size of earth imagery on a terrain surface is often much larger than the input of popular deep convolutional neural networks; second, there exists topological structure dependency between pixel classes on the surface, and such dependency can follow an unknown and non-linear distribution; third, there are often limited training labels. Existing methods for earth imagery segmentation often divide the imagery into patches and consider the elevation as an additional feature channel. These methods do not fully incorporate the spatial topological structural constraint within and across surface patches and thus often show poor results, especially when training labels are limited. Existing methods on semi-supervised and unsupervised learning for earth imagery often focus on learning representation without explicitly incorporating surface topology. In contrast, we propose a novel framework that explicitly models the topological skeleton of a terrain surface with a contour tree from computational topology, which is guided by the physical constraint (e.g., water flow direction on terrains). Our framework consists of two neural networks: a convolutional neural network (CNN) to learn spatial contextual features on a 2D image grid, and a graph neural network (GNN) to learn the statistical distribution of physics-guided spatial topological dependency on the contour tree. The two models are co-trained via variational EM. Evaluations on the real-world flood mapping datasets show that the proposed models outperform baseline methods in classification accuracy, especially when training labels are limited. 

   more » « less
3. On Representation Learning for Road Networks

   https://doi.org/10.1145/3424346  

   Wang, Meng-Xiang ; Lee, Wang-Chien ; Fu, Tao-Yang ; Yu, Ge ( February 2021 , ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology)

   Informative representation of road networks is essential to a wide variety of applications on intelligent transportation systems. In this article, we design a new learning framework, called Representation Learning for Road Networks (RLRN), which explores various intrinsic properties of road networks to learn embeddings of intersections and road segments in road networks. To implement the RLRN framework, we propose a new neural network model, namely Road Network to Vector (RN2Vec), to learn embeddings of intersections and road segments jointly by exploring geo-locality and homogeneity of them, topological structure of the road networks, and moving behaviors of road users. In addition to model design, issues involving data preparation for model training are examined. We evaluate the learned embeddings via extensive experiments on several real-world datasets using different downstream test cases, including node/edge classification and travel time estimation. Experimental results show that the proposed RN2Vec robustly outperforms existing methods, including (i) Feature-based methods : raw features and principal components analysis (PCA); (ii) Network embedding methods : DeepWalk, LINE, and Node2vec; and (iii) Features + Network structure-based methods : network embeddings and PCA, graph convolutional networks, and graph attention networks. RN2Vec significantly outperforms all of them in terms of F1-score in classifying traffic signals (11.96% to 16.86%) and crossings (11.36% to 16.67%) on intersections and in classifying avenue (10.56% to 15.43%) and street (11.54% to 16.07%) on road segments, as well as in terms of Mean Absolute Error in travel time estimation (17.01% to 23.58%). 

   more » « less
4. SeizFt: Interpretable Machine Learning for Seizure Detection Using Wearables

   https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering10080918  

   Al-Hussaini, Irfan ; Mitchell, Cassie S. ( August 2023 , Bioengineering)

   This work presents SeizFt—a novel seizure detection framework that utilizes machine learning to automatically detect seizures using wearable SensorDot EEG data. Inspired by interpretable sleep staging, our novel approach employs a unique combination of data augmentation, meaningful feature extraction, and an ensemble of decision trees to improve resilience to variations in EEG and to increase the capacity to generalize to unseen data. Fourier Transform (FT) Surrogates were utilized to increase sample size and improve the class balance between labeled non-seizure and seizure epochs. To enhance model stability and accuracy, SeizFt utilizes an ensemble of decision trees through the CatBoost classifier to classify each second of EEG recording as seizure or non-seizure. The SeizIt1 dataset was used for training, and the SeizIt2 dataset for validation and testing. Model performance for seizure detection was evaluated using two primary metrics: sensitivity using the any-overlap method (OVLP) and False Alarm (FA) rate using epoch-based scoring (EPOCH). Notably, SeizFt placed first among an array of state-of-the-art seizure detection algorithms as part of the Seizure Detection Grand Challenge at the 2023 International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing (ICASSP). SeizFt outperformed state-of-the-art black-box models in accurate seizure detection and minimized false alarms, obtaining a total score of 40.15, combining OVLP and EPOCH across two tasks and representing an improvement of ~30% from the next best approach. The interpretability of SeizFt is a key advantage, as it fosters trust and accountability among healthcare professionals. The most predictive seizure detection features extracted from SeizFt were: delta wave, interquartile range, standard deviation, total absolute power, theta wave, the ratio of delta to theta, binned entropy, Hjorth complexity, delta + theta, and Higuchi fractal dimension. In conclusion, the successful application of SeizFt to wearable SensorDot data suggests its potential for real-time, continuous monitoring to improve personalized medicine for epilepsy.

    

   more » « less
5. A Raspberry Pi-Based Traumatic Brain Injury Detection System for Single-Channel Electroencephalogram

   https://doi.org/10.3390/s21082779  

   Dhillon, Navjodh ; Sutandi, Agustinus ; Vishwanath, Manoj ; Lim, Miranda ; Cao, Hung ; Si, Dong ( April 2021 , Sensors)

   Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) is a common cause of death and disability. However, existing tools for TBI diagnosis are either subjective or require extensive clinical setup and expertise. The increasing affordability and reduction in the size of relatively high-performance computing systems combined with promising results from TBI related machine learning research make it possible to create compact and portable systems for early detection of TBI. This work describes a Raspberry Pi based portable, real-time data acquisition, and automated processing system that uses machine learning to efficiently identify TBI and automatically score sleep stages from a single-channel Electroencephalogram (EEG) signal. We discuss the design, implementation, and verification of the system that can digitize the EEG signal using an Analog to Digital Converter (ADC) and perform real-time signal classification to detect the presence of mild TBI (mTBI). We utilize Convolutional Neural Networks (CNN) and XGBoost based predictive models to evaluate the performance and demonstrate the versatility of the system to operate with multiple types of predictive models. We achieve a peak classification accuracy of more than 90% with a classification time of less than 1 s across 16–64 s epochs for TBI vs. control conditions. This work can enable the development of systems suitable for field use without requiring specialized medical equipment for early TBI detection applications and TBI research. Further, this work opens avenues to implement connected, real-time TBI related health and wellness monitoring systems. 

   more » « less