4.7 Article

Graph Attention Network with Focal Loss for Seizure Detection on Electroencephalography Signals

期刊

出版社

WORLD SCIENTIFIC PUBL CO PTE LTD
DOI: 10.1142/S0129065721500271

关键词

Electroencephalography (EEG); seizure detection; graph attention network; imbalanced classification; focal loss

资金

  1. Natural Science Foundation of Shandong Province [ZR2016FQ06]
  2. China Postdoctoral Foundation [2017M612335]
  3. China National Natural Science Foundation of China [81871508, 61773246, 61701270, 61501283]
  4. program for Youth Innovative Research Team in University of Shandong Province [2019KJN010]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A novel seizure detection method based on graph attention network (GAT) is proposed to effectively utilize the positional relationships between different EEG signals and address the data imbalance issue. Experimental results show that the proposed method achieves high accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity.
Automatic seizure detection from electroencephalogram (EEG) plays a vital role in accelerating epilepsy diagnosis. Previous researches on seizure detection mainly focused on extracting time-domain and frequency-domain features from single electrodes, while paying little attention to the positional correlations between different EEG channels of the same subject. Moreover, data imbalance is common in seizure detection scenarios where the duration of nonseizure periods is much longer than the duration of seizures. To cope with the two challenges, a novel seizure detection method based on graph attention network (GAT) is presented. The approach acts on graph-structured data and takes the raw EEG data as input. The positional relationship between different EEG signals is exploited by GAT. The loss function of the GAT model is redefined using the focal loss to tackle data imbalance problem. Experiments are conducted on the CHB-MIT dataset. The accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of the proposed method are 98.89%, 97.10% and 99.63%, respectively.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据