Skip to content
aiqbench takeMachine Learning

aiqbench analysis

This study applies machine learning fusion techniques to EEG time-frequency images to predict individual responses to rTMS therapy for depression. While the model achieves high accuracy under relaxed validation conditions, strict subject-disjoint testing reveals significant performance collapse, highlighting the critical challenge of generalizing across diverse patient populations. The work underscores the current difficulty in building robust AI predictors for clinical mental health interventions without overfitting to specific dataset characteristics.
Source coveringarXiv
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

Fusion techniques of time frequency-based images to predict the outcome of rTMS depression therapy

arXiv3 min read

arXiv:2610.00380v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Depression is a mental condition that can lead to suicide and self-harm. Predicting the outcome of depression treatment is one of the most difficult tasks for clinicians. Among various treatment options, repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS) is a widely used non-invasive method. Predicting rTMS response using Electroencephalogram (EEG) data is difficult because of high inter-subject variability and limited features from single-domain analysis. We introduce two fusion techniques, montage and blending, to overcome these limitations and extract richer features from EEG-derived Time-Frequency (TF) images. We then propose a lightweight custom Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) trained on fused TF representations. \textcolor{black}{We use a primary dataset of 15 patients and a secondary dataset of 46 patients. We run two sets of experiments. The first set uses segment-level 10-fold cross-validation. In this setup segments from the same patient can appear in both training and testing. The Montage CWT\_ST fusion reaches 99.90\% accuracy on the primary dataset and 91.90\% on the secondary dataset. The second set uses strict subject-disjoint cross-validation. All segments of a patient stay in one fold and no patient appears in both training and testing. Performance collapses. We test four time-frequency methods, six fusion mechanisms, and fourteen model architectures. With one exception, every configuration on both cohorts falls between AUC 0.31 and 0.54 and every 95\% confidence interval contains 0.5. A patient-level permutation test on the best standalone method returns $p = 0.703$. The best subject-level result is Montage CWT\_ST on the primary cohort, which reaches AUC $0.874 \pm 0.183$ and 82.7\% accuracy.

Abstract:Depression is a mental condition that can lead to suicide and self-harm. Predicting the outcome of depression treatment is one of the most difficult tasks for clinicians. Among various treatment options, repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS) is a widely used non-invasive method. Predicting rTMS response using Electroencephalogram (EEG) data is difficult because of high inter-subject variability and limited features from single-domain analysis. We introduce two fusion techniques, montage and blending, to overcome these limitations and extract richer features from EEG-derived Time-Frequency (TF) images. We then propose a lightweight custom Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) trained on fused TF representations. \textcolor{black}{We use a primary dataset of 15 patients and a secondary dataset of 46 patients. We run two sets of experiments. The first set uses segment-level 10-fold cross-validation. In this setup segments from the same patient can appear in both training and testing. The Montage CWT\_ST fusion reaches 99.90\% accuracy on the primary dataset and 91.90\% on the secondary dataset. The second set uses strict subject-disjoint cross-validation. All segments of a patient stay in one fold and no patient appears in both training and testing. Performance collapses. We test four time-frequency methods, six fusion mechanisms, and fourteen model architectures. With one exception, every configuration on both cohorts falls between AUC 0.31 and 0.54 and every 95\% confidence interval contains 0.5. A patient-level permutation test on the best standalone method returns $p = 0.703$. The best subject-level result is Montage CWT\_ST on the primary cohort, which reaches AUC $0.874 \pm 0.183$ and 82.7\% accuracy.

Machine Learning (cs.LG)

arXiv:2610.00380 [cs.LG]

(or arXiv:2610.00380v1 [cs.LG] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.00380 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bspc.2026.111375 Focus to learn more DOI(s) linking to related resources

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Full text under the publisher's open licence · 355 words

Related coverage