Back

A Gradient-based Spectral Explainability Method for EEG Deep Learning Classifiers

Ellis, C. A.; Sendi, M. S. E.; Miller, R. L.; Calhoun, V. D.

2021-07-14 bioinformatics
10.1101/2021.07.14.452360 bioRxiv
Show abstract

The automated feature extraction capabilities of deep learning classifiers have promoted their broader application to EEG analysis. In contrast to earlier machine learning studies that used extracted features and traditional explainability approaches, explainability for classifiers trained on raw data is particularly challenging. As such, studies have begun to present methods that provide insight into the spectral features learned by deep learning classifiers trained on raw EEG. These approaches have two key shortcomings. (1) They involve perturbation, which can create out-of-distribution samples that cause inaccurate explanations. (2) They are global, not local. Local explainability approaches can be used to examine how demographic and clinical variables affected the patterns learned by the classifier. In our study, we present a novel local spectral explainability approach. We apply it to a convolutional neural network trained for automated sleep stage classification. We apply layer-wise relevance propagation to identify the relative importance of the features in the raw EEG and subsequently examine the frequency domain of the explanations to determine the importance of each canonical frequency band locally and globally. We then perform a statistical analysis to determine whether age and sex affected the patterns learned by the classifier for each frequency band and sleep stage. Results showed that {delta}, {beta}, and {gamma} were the overall most important frequency bands. In addition, age and sex significantly affected the patterns learned by the classifier for most sleep stages and frequency bands. Our study presents a novel spectral explainability approach that could substantially increase the level of insight into classifiers trained on raw EEG.

Matching journals

The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.