Back

Feature-Engineering Strategies for EEG-Based ADHD Classification in Children: A Controlled Benchmark of Expert, LLM-Guided and Full-Space Comparators

Rohani, F.; Alhatab, H.; Jarrud, M.; Salous, N.; Kasimoglu, S.; Mueller, A.

2026-10-07 psychiatry and clinical psychology
10.64898/2026.10.06.26364825 medRxiv
Show abstract

EEG-based machine-learning studies of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) are vulnerable to optimistic performance estimates when feature selection or model choice is informed by data outside the training fold. We compared expert-reconstructed, large language model (LLM)-guided and full-space feature strategies under leakage-controlled subject-level validation in a frozen cohort of 77 children (45 ADHD, 32 controls) represented by 1,185 gamma-free EEG features. Four classifiers (SVM, GMM, random forest [RF] and XGBoost) were evaluated with nested leave-one-subject-out cross-validation (LOOCV), with all data-dependent operations restricted to outer-training subjects. Across 100 repetitions of stratified 10-fold cross-validation, RF/expert achieved mean accuracy 62.8% (SD 3.5%; empirical 95% interval 55.8% -- 69.5%), mean balanced accuracy 62.3% and mean AUC-ROC 0.618. The corresponding LOOCV point estimate was 71.4% accuracy and 71.0% balanced accuracy (AUC-ROC 0.673). GMM/expert achieved the highest AUC-ROC (0.699), indicating metric-dependent model ranking. The expert-reconstructed strategy achieved the highest accuracy and balanced accuracy for every classifier, whereas the LLM-guided strategy showed no consistent advantage over the full feature space. Pairwise classifier differences were not significant after Holm correction. A pre-specified 200 V artifact gate reduced RF/expert accuracy to approximately 55.8%, below the 58.4% no-information rate; this drop may reflect removal of artifact-related signal and/or reduced epoch counts leading to noisier feature estimates. These findings support cautious benchmarking and external validation rather than claims of algorithmic or LLM superiority. Keywords: ADHD; electroencephalography; machine learning; benchmarking; feature engineering; subject-level validation; nested cross-validation; random forest; clinical prediction

Matching journals

The top 9 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.