Kernel machines for epilepsy diagnosis via EEG signal classification: A comparative study

• Published in: Artificial intelligence in medicine 2011-10, Vol.53 (2), p.83-95
• Main Authors: Lima, Clodoaldo A.M, Coelho, André L.V
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Artificial Intelligence; EEG signal classification; Electroencephalography - methods; Epilepsy; Epilepsy - diagnosis; Feature extraction; Humans; Internal Medicine; Kernel machines; Other; Sensitivity and Specificity; Support Vector Machine
• ISSN: 0933-3657; 1873-2860
• DOI: 10.1016/j.artmed.2011.07.003

Abstract Objective We carry out a systematic assessment on a suite of kernel-based learning machines while coping with the task of epilepsy diagnosis through automatic electroencephalogram (EEG) signal classification. Methods and materials The kernel machines investigated include the standard support vector machine (SVM), the least squares SVM, the Lagrangian SVM, the smooth SVM, the proximal SVM, and the relevance vector machine. An extensive series of experiments was conducted on publicly available data, whose clinical EEG recordings were obtained from five normal subjects and five epileptic patients. The performance levels delivered by the different kernel machines are contrasted in terms of the criteria of predictive accuracy, sensitivity to the kernel function/parameter value, and sensitivity to the type of features extracted from the signal. For this purpose, 26 values for the kernel parameter (radius) of two well-known kernel functions (namely, Gaussian and exponential radial basis functions) were considered as well as 21 types of features extracted from the EEG signal, including statistical values derived from the discrete wavelet transform, Lyapunov exponents, and combinations thereof. Results We first quantitatively assess the impact of the choice of the wavelet basis on the quality of the features extracted. Four wavelet basis functions were considered in this study. Then, we provide the average accuracy (i.e., cross-validation error) values delivered by 252 kernel machine configurations; in particular, 40%/35% of the best-calibrated models of the standard and least squares SVMs reached 100% accuracy rate for the two kernel functions considered. Moreover, we show the sensitivity profiles exhibited by a large sample of the configurations whereby one can visually inspect their levels of sensitiveness to the type of feature and to the kernel function/parameter value. Conclusions Overall, the results evidence that all kernel machines are competitive in terms of accuracy, with the standard and least squares SVMs prevailing more consistently. Moreover, the choice of the kernel function and parameter value as well as the choice of the feature extractor are critical decisions to be taken, albeit the choice of the wavelet family seems not to be so relevant. Also, the statistical values calculated over the Lyapunov exponents were good sources of signal representation, but not as informative as their wavelet counterparts. Finally, a typical sensitivity pro