IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0174702.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What are the assets and weaknesses of HFO detectors? A benchmark framework based on realistic simulations

Author

Listed:
  • Nicolas Roehri
  • Francesca Pizzo
  • Fabrice Bartolomei
  • Fabrice Wendling
  • Christian-George Bénar

Abstract

High-frequency oscillations (HFO) have been suggested as biomarkers of epileptic tissues. While visual marking of these short and small oscillations is tedious and time-consuming, automatic HFO detectors have not yet met a large consensus. Even though detectors have been shown to perform well when validated against visual marking, the large number of false detections due to their lack of robustness hinder their clinical application. In this study, we developed a validation framework based on realistic and controlled simulations to quantify precisely the assets and weaknesses of current detectors. We constructed a dictionary of synthesized elements—HFOs and epileptic spikes—from different patients and brain areas by extracting these elements from the original data using discrete wavelet transform coefficients. These elements were then added to their corresponding simulated background activity (preserving patient- and region- specific spectra). We tested five existing detectors against this benchmark. Compared to other studies confronting detectors, we did not only ranked them according their performance but we investigated the reasons leading to these results. Our simulations, thanks to their realism and their variability, enabled us to highlight unreported issues of current detectors: (1) the lack of robust estimation of the background activity, (2) the underestimated impact of the 1/f spectrum, and (3) the inadequate criteria defining an HFO. We believe that our benchmark framework could be a valuable tool to translate HFOs into a clinical environment.

Suggested Citation

  • Nicolas Roehri & Francesca Pizzo & Fabrice Bartolomei & Fabrice Wendling & Christian-George Bénar, 2017. "What are the assets and weaknesses of HFO detectors? A benchmark framework based on realistic simulations," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(4), pages 1-20, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0174702
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0174702
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0174702
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0174702&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0174702?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sergey Burnos & Peter Hilfiker & Oguzkan Sürücü & Felix Scholkmann & Niklaus Krayenbühl & Thomas Grunwald & Johannes Sarnthein, 2014. "Human Intracranial High Frequency Oscillations (HFOs) Detected by Automatic Time-Frequency Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(4), pages 1-12, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      More about this item

      Statistics

      Access and download statistics

      Corrections

      All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0174702. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

      If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

      If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

      For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

      Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

      IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.