ABSTRACT
The interpretation of electroencephalograms (EEGs) is a process that is still dependent on the subjective analysis of the examiners. Though interrater agreement on critical events such as seizures is high, it is much lower on subtler events (e.g., when there are benign variants). The process used by an expert to interpret an EEG is quite subjective and hard to replicate by machine. The performance of machine learning technology is far from human performance. We have been developing an interpretation system, AutoEEG, with a goal of exceeding human performance on this task. In this work, we are focusing on one of the early decisions made in this process - whether an EEG is normal or abnormal. We explore two baseline classification algorithms: k-Nearest Neighbor (kNN) and Random Forest Ensemble Learning (RF). A subset of the TUH EEG Corpus was used to evaluate performance. Principal Components Analysis (PCA) was used to reduce the dimensionality of the data. kNN achieved a 41.8% detection error rate while RF achieved an error rate of 31.7%. These error rates are significantly lower than those obtained by random guessing based on priors (49.5%). The majority of the errors were related to misclassification of normal EEGs.
