Artificial Intelligence for Neurological Disorders
Rîciu Ionela Mirela
Faculty of Automatic Control and Computer Science
Bucharest, Romania ionela_mirela.riciu@stud.fim.upb.ro
Abstract— Artificial intelligence (AI) is an important
field of computer science that is commonly used for
analyzing complex medical data and for many clinical
aims. With the support of machine learning techniques,
various studies have used data-driven approaches to better
understand some syndromes and with the fast
improvement of neuroimaging data acquisition strategies,
there have been a significant increase in learning
neurological disorders among data mining and machine
learning. Current research in data mining (DM) shows a
growing interest in diagnosing brain disorders based on
electroencephalogram (EEG) analysis derived from
automated nervous system responses. The purpose of this
article is to provide an overview of research on the analysis
and interpretation of EEG signals, using automated AI
applications based on data mining and machine learning
(ML) algorithms for detecting and diagnosing neurological
disorders. In this study, we assessed the sensitivity of
different algorithms and datasets classifying neurological
disorders syndromes.
Keywords — Data mining, machin learning techniques,
Support Vector Machines, EEG signals, Classifiers
I. INTRODUCTION
Artificial intelligence and data mining techniques have been
used in many fields to solve applications and algorithms for
classification, segmentation, association, diagnosis and
prediction. This area covers a wide variety of computational
issues, machine learning, time series analysis, and pattern
recognition. Machine learning is a fundamental concept in the
field of artificial intelligence (AI).
Therefore, current research in data mining shows an
increasing interest in neurophysiological signal analysis. Based
on the analysis of electroencephalogram (EEG) which derives
from automatic nervous system responses, computers can
assess user emotions and find correlations between significant
EEG features extracted from the raw data and the human
emotional states, as well as of specific associated
manifestations - agitation, pain, panic.
Several studies have suggested different machine learning
algorithms to classify or predict pain conditions. These
algorithms have been trained with a variety of data types that
have allowed the classification of pain. According to “The
International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP)”, pain is
defined as an unpleasant sensory and emotional experience
associated with actual or potential tissue damage or is
described in terms of "damage" [1]. For the study of pain, as
1
well as any other sensation, the conditions of the experiment
must be clearly defined in order to perform a correct
experimental procedure.
In this paper, we have highlighted various artificial
intelligence techniques used in the field of interpretation of
neurological signals and important methodological steps that
should be considered when conducting an experiment using
machine learning.
II. RELATED WORKS
Artificial intelligence (AI) is gradually changing medical
practice. With recent advances in digitized data acquisition,
machine learning (ML) and AI applications are expanding into
a variety of areas [2].
i. Research on using AI techniques in pain-related data
analysis
In the context of current research, when pain-related data
are provided, machine learning methods are able to learn to
map complex characteristics to a known class, i.e. to predict a
pain phenotype class from a complex model of acquired
parameters. After the "machine" has predicted a pain-related
phenotype, the algorithm can be used later on new data from
which the class membership of a new but unclassified subject
can be identified [3].
Classic machine learning approaches such as Support
Vector Machine (SVM) and ‘Random Forest’ are widely used.
[4]. AI has the opportunity to improve the ability to make
decisions in applications in the field of neuroscience and for
this purpose it is important to build explainable algorithms and
create a comprehensive database. Computed tomography (CT),
Positron Emission Tomography (PET) and Magnetic
Resonance Imaging (MRI) have revolutionized the study of the
brain by allowing doctors to perform non-invasive procedures
of the cranial structure and deduce the causes of abnormal
functioning due to various diseases [5].
ii. Research on using DM techniques in EEG analysis
Data Mining (DM) techniques have had a major impact on
Artificial Intelligence. An overview of Data Mining and its
application for electroencephalogram (EEG) analysis can be
given by presenting a working definition for DM and some
examples of papers on DM applied to EEG analysis [3], [6].
Data Mining is an algorithm for extracting patterns from
large databases and uses statistical methods, machine learning
and other related fields [7].
A recent area for data mining is classification using
association rules that use a special subset of association rules
whose consequences are limited to the classification class
attribute. These rules are called Class Association Rules
(CARs) and, after their generation, are used to form a
classification model [7].
iii. Research on use of neurological signals to classify pain
states
The complex processes of the pain experience and
modulation within the brain are of substantial interest to the
field of pain neuroimaging. The brain and subcortical structures
together serve as an organ system that can reasonably well be
assessed using several non-invasive neuroimaging techniques,
most commonly structural and functional magnetic resonance
imaging (MRI) [8].
In [5], authors present models based on functional MRI
(fMRI) data come from paradigms in which the sensory input
spans multiple seconds. fMRI models are also based on whole-
brain analyses and identify regions beyond sensorimotor cortex
that play a role in the sensory, cognitive, and emotional
components of pain [9]. Pain-related oscillations recorded over
contralateral sensorimotor cortices are associated with
increased theta and gamma power [10], [11].
III. COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF SOLUTIONS
Precise detection and localization of abnormal tissue and
surrounding healthy structures are indeed crucial for diagnosis.
However, machine learning techniques usually involve several
steps. For example, pre-image processing, feature selection and
grading, dimensionality reduction are often required as initial
steps to increase algorithm performance to appropriate levels
[12].
Electroencephalogram is a neuroimaging technique, with
complex data sets derived from brain electrical activity and
recorded at different frequency bands, resulting in feature
models detected only with advanced mathematical models [13].
Classification, one of the most common machine learning
tasks, has attracted attention in recent years. Classification is
done using algorithms that are able to recognize the class of a
feature vector. There are many ways to present a classifier,
with common representations that include "if-then" rules,
decision trees, neural networks, mathematical functions such as
linear functions [14]. A series of entries, called a feature set,
are generated to the machine learning classifier. The classifiers
then render an output prediction, based on previous training,
using a set of characteristics with known results (Fig.1)
Fig. 1. Fig.1. Overview of machine learning classifier design
Machine learning classifiers can be divided into six main
categories and each category has several numbers of classifiers
[15].
Finally, among all the six categories of classifiers
discussed, conclusion is that they can be used for neurological
2
disorder and sentiment classification, pattern recognition, and
polarity prediction.
SVM Support Vector Machine – it is a technique that uses
decision plans that define certain "limits". A decision plan is a
plan that separates a set of objects from different classes.
These classifiers are found in most specialized papers for the
study and analysis of pain [3], [16].
Convolutional Neural Networks are analytical
computational tools that are inspired by the biological nervous
system. In study [17] is present a novel classification
framework, called diverse frequency band-based
Convolutional Neural Networks. The proposed model is
capable of classifying three classes of tonic pain.
Random forest they use a multitude of simple
decision trees, usually based on a random selection of a small
set of features. Each decision tree uses a data structure
(parameters) and each tree in the random forest votes for a
class. The final classification assigned to a data point follows
the majority of these class votes [18]
Multiple Layer Perceptron (MLP). The study [19] shows a
difference between machine learning methods: decision trees
(DT), multilayer perceptron (MLP), neighbors with the nearest
K (kNN) and support vector machines (SVM). MLP and kNN
produce comparable results that are almost the same and SVM
showed the best result in terms of accuracy.
The paper [20] presents a machine learning approach to
analyze self-reporting data collected from integrated
biopsychosocial treatment, to identify an optimal set of
characteristics and in addition proposes a classification model
to differentiate the stages of treatment for pain.
Extra Trees Classifier (ETC). In [21], performance of three
learning models was tested: logistic regression, decision tree
and extra tree. Together, these provide powerful insights about
the most relevant features that allow classifying patients from
controls. Where maximum performance was obtained with an
extra tree classifier
Article [22] describes the performance of different
classification algorithms to determine the best method and
which of them performed the classification task best. Also,
important methodological steps are described that should be
considered when using machine learning techniques. Their
performance was obtained based on three AUC scores (area
under the receiver operating curve), BACC (balanced
accuracy) and LLOSS (cross-entropy loss or log-loss).
The results of the specialized papers were analysed in
detail to find the best performance / computing complexity
ratio for evaluate classifiers and determine which of them
performed the classification task better. ‘Performance’ would
include accuracy, repeatability, error rate, and 'computer
complexity' would mean runtime, latency, storage capacity.
Table 1 presents the most used classifiers and their
characteristics in the study of neurological disorders.
Depending on the study (as shown above), each classification
method is characterized by certain features. The P / CC
evaluation index was used to analyze the classifier, receiving
three scores: low, moderate, high.
Table 1: Main characteristics of analysed classifiers.
IV. PROPOSED SOLUTION
In the following, taking into account the results of the
analysis performed in Chapter III which states the advantages
of a SVM classifier appreciated by the best performance /
computing complexity ratio, the results of an experimental
study that validate our option are presented.
• Proposed Methology
The proposed methodology for EEG analysis and pain
assessment consists of the following steps (Fig. 2)
Fig. 2. Fig. 2 Proposed scheme for feature extraction and classification of
EEG signal
• Database
The analyzed EEG signals are part of the UK Data Service
UK database [23], being the only database containing cortical,
behavioral and physiological responses from a neonatal sample
following the application of an external stimulus (clinical blood
test). Cortical activity was recorded in 112 newborns aged 29-
47 weeks, using the Electroencephalogram (EEG).
The methodology consists of six phases, starting with the
phase initial- data loading, followed by understanding the data
(View / Selection), data processing, modeling, evaluation and
knowledge discovery [13].
• Processing
All processing was performed in Matlab. Pain and non-pain
EEG segments were selected: 2 seconds pre-stimulus and 2
3
seconds post-stimulus. Both time and frequency domain
features were extracted from both segment types. After a
statistical selection, the features are fed into in classifier whose
performances are then compared.
For each data set, pre- / post-stimulus, the following
was applied:
Discrete Wavelet Transform (DWT) to separate brain
waves and find the approximation coefficients A and detail D.
The DWT is widely used for the time–frequency analysis of
biomedical signals, especially in an EEG signal analysis due
to its non-stationary characteristics [25].
Paired t-tests were performed for all features to determine
which bring more value to the differentiation between the two
classes. The maxPSD value proved itself to be a good one
differentiator for most of the recordings. Based on the rejection
of the null hypothesis (H = 1, p <0.01) for the majority of
patients and corresponding recordings.
• Classifier Training and Validation
One algorithm are used for classifications: support-vector
machine (SVM). SVMs are adequate for datasets that contain
two classes.
The performance of the SVM classifier is evaluated by
calculating the accuracy (ACC). As mentioned in article [26]
and correlating with the results we want to obtain regarding the
classification of pain.
The mathematical expression of the parameter that
measures the performance of the classifier is (5) [25]
ACC = (TP + TN) / (TP + TN + FP + FN) x 100 % (5)
Before entering the cleaned and standardized data set in the
feature selection phase using t-test, the data sets were divided
into training (80% of the data set) and test data sets (20% of the
data set), used to build a predictive model and test the
performance of that model.
• Results and Analysis
Table 2: Classification results following t-test application
 After obtaining all the characteristics (statistical mean,
median, variance, standard deviation, Shannon entropy,
skewness and kurtosis), both for the non-stimulus signal and
the stimulus signal we used t-test to classify them. In Table 2,
are the results after applying the t-test.
The highest accuracy of 65% was obtained for the
classification of the power spectral density of beta waves, using
the median characteristic (Fig.3).
The values of classification accuracy are higher in
situations where the classification was performed using brain
wave characteristics, than in situations where the classification
was performed using signal characteristics before Wavelet
decomposition.
Fig. 3. Fig.3 Results for beta PSD - median characteristic in frequency
V. CONCLUSIONS
After analyzing the literature of the last ten years, the
results were distributed after the year of publication and the
Data Mining and Machin Learning algorithms commonly
used. The results found in the papers were analyzed in detail to
find the limitations they faced and to see how much the
performance of classification methods has increased over the
years. This study also looked at state-of-the-art techniques
used in pain assessment based on Data Mining and Machin
Learning. The result of this research / review of the literature
can help specialists in the medical field, providing in-depth
information on treatment and recommended solutions for the
development of reliable medical systems.
Distinct information was indicated, such as the nature of
the application, the techniques used, the evaluation performed
for each study and the characteristics and classes extracted
with accuracy percentages for the machine learning algorithms
used.
EEG may be a simple and objective tool for studying the
mechanisms involved in chronic pain, but nevertheless, more
studies are needed before any conclusion can be reached
regarding the usefulness of EEG from a clinical point of view.
As there is no universal method considered suitable for
analyzing EEG signals, from the analysis I consider that it is
best to use different methods of obtaining the characteristics,
otherwise a combination of results can be obtained that can be
used for a classification algorithm. automatic EEG signal.
REFERENCES
[1] Treede R.D., Rief W., Barke A., Aziz Q., Bennett M.I., Benoliel R.,
Cohen M., Evers S., Finnerup N.B., First M.B., et al. Chronic pain as a
symptom or a disease: The IASP Classification of Chronic Pain for the
International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) Pain. 2019.
[2] K. H. Yu, A. L. Beam, and I. S. Kohane, “Artificial intelligence in
healthcare,” Nat. Biomed. Eng., vol. 2, no. 10, pp. 719–731, 2018.
[3] Lötsch, Jörn, and Alfred Ultsch. "Machine learning in pain research."
Pain 159.4 (2018): 623. Institute of Clinical Pharmacology, Germany.
[4] Bonotis, Panagiotis A., et al. "Automated Assessment of Pain Intensity
based on EEG Signal Analysis." 2019 IEEE 19th International
Conference on Bioinformatics and Bioengineering (BIBE). IEEE, 2019.
[5] Yasaka and O. Abe, “Deep learning and artificial intelligence in
radiology: Current applications and future directions,” PLoS Med. 15,
e1002707 (2018).
[6] Santana, Alex Novaes, Charles Novaes de Santana, and Pedro Montoya.
"Chronic Pain Diagnosis Using Machine Learning, Questionnaires, and
QST: A Sensitivity Experiment." Diagnostics 10.11 (2020): 958.
[7] Wong, Simeon M., et al. "Detection of high-frequency oscillations in
electroencephalography: A scoping review and an adaptable open-source
framework." Seizure (2020). .
[8] Martucci, K. T., & Mackey, S. C. (2019). Neuroimaging of pain: human
evidence and clinical relevance of central nervous system processes and
modulation. Anesthesiology, 128(6), 1241-1254.
[9] Da Silva, Joyce T., and David A. Seminowicz. "Neuroimaging of pain in
animal models: a review of recent literature." Pain Reports 4.4 (2019).
[10] Wang, Wei-en, et al. "Altered neural oscillations within and between
sensorimotor cortex and parietal cortex in chronic jaw pain."
NeuroImage: Clinical 24 (2019): 101964.
[11] Tan, Linette Liqi, et al. "Gamma oscillations in somatosensory cortex
recruit prefrontal and descending serotonergic pathways in aversion and
nociception." Nature communications 10.1 (2019): 1-17.
[12] A.Gudigar, U. Raghavendra, A. Hegde, M. Kalyani, E. J. Ciaccio, and
U. R. Acharya, “Brain pathology identification using computer aided
diagnostic tool: A systematic review,” Comput. Methods Programs
Biomed. 187, 105205 (2020).
[13] Mohammadi, Mahdi, et al. "An Intuitive Guide to Linear Discriminant
Analysis (LDA)" 2020.
[14] Tighe, Patrick J., et al. "Use of machine-learning classifiers to predict
requests for preoperative acute pain service consultation." Pain
Medicine, 1347-1357.
[15] Soofi, A. A., & Awan, A. (2017). Classification techniques in machine
learning: applications and issues. Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences,
13, 459-465.
[16] Levitt, Joshua, et al. "Pain phenotypes classified by machine learning
using electroencephalography features." NeuroImage 223 (2020).
[17] Yu, Mingxin, et al. "Diverse frequency band-based convolutional neural
networks for tonic cold pain assessment using EEG." Neurocomputing
378 (2020): 270-282.
[18] Lötsch J, Geisslinger G, Heinemann S, Lerch F, Oertel BG, Ultsch A.
QST response patterns to capsaicin- and UV-B-induced local skin
hypersensitization in healthy subjects: a machine-learned analysis. PAIN
2017;159:11–24.
[19] Alyamani, Amina. "Classification of eeg signal by methods of machine
learning." Applied Computer Science, vol 16, no 4 (2020.
[20] Huang Y, Zheng H, Nugent C, McCullagh P, Black N, Vowles KE,
McCracken L. Feature selection and classification in supporting report-
based self-management for people with chronic pain. IEEE Trans Inf
Technol Biomed;15:54–61.
[21] Vanegas, M. Isabel, et al. "Machine learning for EEG-based biomarkers
in Parkinson’s disease." 2018 IEEE International Conference on
Bioinformatics and Biomedicine (BIBM). IEEE, 2018.
[22] Santana, Alex Novaes, Charles Novaes de Santana, and Pedro Montoya.
"Chronic Pain Diagnosis Using Machine Learning, Questionnaires, and
QST: A Sensitivity Experiment." Diagnostics 10.11 (2020): 958.
[23] Jones, L. et al. UK Data Service https://doi.org/10.5255/UKDA-SN-
853204 (2018.
[24] Wei-en Wang, Gaurav Misra, Derek B. Archer, Arnab Roy, and Stephen
A. Coombes (2017), Automated classification of pain perception using
high-density electroencephalography data. Journal of neurophysiology,
117(2), 786-795.