ADHD Subtype Diagnosis for Multiclass Imbalanced Augmented EEG Data
Vandana Joshi
(Login required)
Gujarat Technological University, India
Paper #9203 received 6 Jan 2025; revised manuscript received 29 Jan 2025; accepted for publication 4 Feb 2025; published online 14 Mar 2025.
DOI: 10.18287/JBPE25.11.010302
Abstract
Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is a neurodevelopmental condition that impacts an individual’s emotional state, actions, and ability to acquire knowledge. The diagnosis is challenging due to the different characteristics of its distinct subtypes: inattention, hyperactivity, and impulsivity. ADHD has been diagnosed using a range of techniques, such as fMRI and behavioural evaluations. Electroencephalography (EEG) has garnered interest due to its capacity to uncover atypical brain activity patterns. Nevertheless, using EEG data in ADHD research poses difficulties due to the limited annotated datasets and substantial inter-individual variations. To address these difficulties, we have investigated various approaches to improve EEG data: Synthetic Minority Over-sampling Technique (SMOTE) variants, Non-deterministic Conditional Tabular Generative Adversarial Network (ND-CTGAN), and EEG-GAN variants. SMOTE variants have generated synthetic samples to address class imbalances, enhancing classification performance. ND-CTGAN has generated synthetic EEG data of superior quality, preserved inter-channel correlations and spectral properties, and improved the classification model’s accuracy, recall, and precision. Statistical analyses have verified that synthetic data closely reflects the distributions and connections seen in real data. This similarity allows for strong comparisons and improves the ability of models. These findings not only enhance our understanding of ADHD but also inspire hope for future studies in the field, demonstrating the potential of advanced augmentation techniques to significantly enhance classification accuracy in EEG research
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
1. R. J. Barry, A. R. Clarke, and S. J. Johnstone, “A review of electrophysiology in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: I. Qualitative and quantitative electroencephalography,” Clinical Neurophysiology 114(2), 171–183 (2003).
2. M. N. I. Qureshi, B. Min, H. J. Jo, and B. Lee, “Multiclass classification for the differential diagnosis on the ADHD subtypes using recursive feature elimination and hierarchical extreme learning machine: structural mri study,” PLoS ONE 11(8), e0160697 (2016).
3. S. L. Karalunas, J. T. Nigg, “Heterogeneity and subtyping in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder—considerations for emerging research using person-centered computational approaches,” Biological Psychiatry 88(1), 103–110 (2020).
4. D. Katsuki, H. Yamashita, K. Yamane, S. Kanba, and K. Yoshida, “Clinical subtypes in children with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder according to their child behavior checklist profile,” Child Psychiatry & Human Development 51(6), 969–977 (2020).
5. M. Rostami, S. Farashi, R. Khosrowabadi, and H. Pouretemad, “Discrimination of ADHD subtypes using decision tree on behavioral, neuropsychological and neural markers,” Basic and Clinical Neuroscience Journal 11(3), 359–368 (2019).
6. A. Kamida, K. Shimabayashi, M. Oguri, T. Takamori, N. Ueda, Y. Koyanagi, N. Sannomiya, H. Nagira, S. Ikunishi, Y. Hattori, K. Sato, C. Fukuda, Y. Hirooka, and Y. Maegaki, “EEG power spectrum analysis in children with ADHD,” Yonago Acta Medica 59(2), 169–173 (2016).
7. M. Rostami, R. Khosrowabadi, B. Albrecht, A. Rothenberger, and H. Pouretemad, “Classifying ADHD subtypes/presentations considering the joint effect of three levels of investigation,” Nordic Journal of Psychiatry 75(1), 31–37 (2021).
8. R. Aldemir, E. Demirci, H. Per, M. Canpolat, S. Özmen, and M. Tokmakçı, “Investigation of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) sub-types in children via EEG frequency domain analysis,” International Journal of Neuroscience 128(4), 349–360 (2018).
9. A. R. Clarke, R. J. Barry, R. McCarthy, and M. Selikowitz, “EEG-defined subtypes of children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder,” Clinical Neurophysiology 112(11), 2098–2105 (2001).
10. C. Rommel, J. Paillard, T. Moreau, and A. Gramfort, “Data augmentation for learning predictive models on EEG: a systematic comparison,” Journal of Neural Engineering 19(6), 066020 (2022).
11. A. G. Habashi, A. M. Azab, S. Eldawlatly, and G. M. Aly, “Generative adversarial networks in EEG analysis: an overview,” Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation 20(1), 40 (2023).
12. Y. Roy, H. Banville, I. Albuquerque, A. Gramfort, T. H. Falk, and J. Faubert, “Deep learning-based electroencephalography analysis: a systematic review,” Journal of Neural Engineering 16(5), 051001 (2019).
13. V. Joshi, N. Nanavati, “Inter-class correlation-based EEG channel selection for ADHD classification,” IAENG International Journal of Computer Science 51(8), 961–975 (2024).
14. J. J. Newson, T. C. Thiagarajan, “EEG frequency bands in psychiatric disorders: a review of resting state studies,” Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 12, 521 (2019).
15. J. Kwasa, A. Noyce, and B. Shinn-Cunningham, “Top-down attention modulates neural responses in neurotypical, but not ADHD, young adults,” The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 150(4_Supplement), A64–A64 (2021).
16. C. C. Williams, D. Weinhardt, M. Wirzberger, and S. Musslick, “Augmenting EEG with generative adversarial networks enhances brain decoding across classifiers and sample sizes,” Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society 45(45) (2023).
17. N. V. Chawla, K. W. Bowyer, L. O. Hall, and W. P. Kegelmeyer, “SMOTE: synthetic minority over-sampling technique,” Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 16, 321–357 (2002).
18. N. Alsharif, M. H. Al-Adhaileh, and M. Al-Yaari, “Accurate identification of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder using machine learning approaches,” Journal of Disability Research 3(1), (2024).
19. L. Shahmoradi, Z. Liraki, M. Karami, B. Savareh, and M. Nosratabadi, “Development of decision support system to predict neurofeedback response in adhd: an artificial neural network approach,” Acta Informatica Medica 27(3), 186 (2019).
20. T. V. Padmavathy, M. Vinothkumar, and M. N. Vimal Kumar, “Modified cuckoo search- cascade forest (Mcs-cf) for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (adhd) diagnosis,” NeuroQuantology 18(7), 83–94(2020).
21. H. Alkahtani, T. Aldhyani, Z. Ahmed, and A. Alqarni, “Developing system-based artificial intelligence models for detecting the attention deficit hyperactivity disorder,” Mathematics 11(22), 4698 (2023).
22. A. Alhudhaif, “A novel multi-class imbalanced EEG signals classification based on the adaptive synthetic sampling (ADASYN) approach,” PeerJ Computer Science 7, e523 (2021).
23. Z. Jiang, W. Zhao, “Fusion algorithm for imbalanced EEG,” Seizure 91, 207–211 (2021).
24. P. Zhang, X. Zhang, and A. Liu, “Effects of data augmentation with the bnnsmote algorithm in seizure detection using 1D-MobileNet,” Journal of Healthcare Engineering 2022, 1–13 (2022).
25. R. Wardoyo, I. M. A. Wirawan, and I. G. A. Pradipta, “Data processing in seizure detection oversampling approach using radius- SMOTE for imbalance electroencephalography datasets,” Emerging Science Journal 6(2), 382–398 (2022).
26. Y. Chen, R. Chang, and J. Guo, “Effects of data augmentation method borderline-smote on emotion recognition of eeg signals based on convolutional neural network,” IEEE Access 9, 47491–47502 (2021).
27. T. Lee, M. Kim, and S. P. Kim, “Data augmentation effects using borderline-SMOTE on classification of a P300-based BCI,” 8th International Winter Conference on Brain-Computer Interface, 9–12 (2020).
28. T. Lee, M. Kim, and S.-P. Kim, “Improvement of P300-based brain–computer interfaces for home appliances control by data balancing techniques,” Sensors 20(19), 5576 (2020).
29. K. Rasheed, J. Qadir, T. J. O’Brien, L. Kuhlmann, and A. Razi, “A generative model to synthesize EEG data for epileptic seizure prediction,” IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering 29, 2322–2332 (2021).
30. D. Geng, Z. S. Chen, “Auxiliary classifier generative adversarial network for interictal epileptiform discharge modeling and EEG data augmentation,” 10th International IEEE/EMBS Conference on Neural Engineering, 1130–1133 (2021).
31. M. P. Kalashami, M. M. Pedram, and H. Sadr, “EEG feature extraction and data augmentation in emotion recognition,” Computational Intelligence and Neuroscience 2022, 1–16 (2022).
32. A. Zhang, L. Su, Y. Zhang, Y. Fu, L. Wu, and S. Liang, “EEG data augmentation for emotion recognition with a multiple generator conditional Wasserstein GAN,” Complex & Intelligent Systems 8(4), 3059–3071 (2022).
33. M. Xu, Y. Chen, Y. Wang, D. Wang, Z. Liu, and L. Zhang, “BWGAN-GP: an EEG data generation method for class imbalance problem in RSVP tasks,” IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering 30, 251–263 (2022).
34. Y. Song, L. Yang, X. Jia, and L. Xie, “Common spatial generative adversarial networks based EEG data augmentation for cross-subject brain-computer interface,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2102.04456 (2021).
35. R. Zhang, Y. Zeng, L. Tong, J. Shu, R. Lu, K. Yang, Z. Li, and B. Yan, “ERP-WGAN: A data augmentation method for EEG single-trial detection,” Journal of Neuroscience Methods 376, 109621 (2022).
36. J. Yoon, D. Jarrett, and M. van der Schaar, “Time-series generative adversarial networks,” Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32, 1–11 (2019).
37. B. Ganti, G. Chaitanya, R. S. Balamurugan, N. Nagaraj, K. Balasubramanian, and S. Pati, “Time-series generative adversarial network approach of deep learning improves seizure detection from the human thalamic SEEG,” Frontiers in Neurology 13, 755094 (2022).
38. O. George, R. Smith, P. Madiraju, N. Yahyasoltani, and S. I. Ahamed, “Data augmentation strategies for EEG-based motor imagery decoding,” Heliyon 8(8), e10240 (2022).
39. L. Xu, M. Skoularidou, A. Cuesta-Infante, and K. Veeramachaneni, “Modeling tabular data using conditional GAN,” Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32, (2019).
40. M. J. Cheon, D. H. Lee, J. W. Park, H. J. Choi, J. S. Lee, and O. Lee, “CTGAN VS TGAN? Which one is more suitable for generating synthetic EEG data,” Journal of Theoretical and Applied Information Technology 99(10), 2359–2372 (2021).
41. V. Joshi, N. Nanavati, “A review of EEG signal analysis for diagnosis of neurological disorders using machine learning,” Journal of Biomedical Photonics and Engineering 7(4), (2021).
Сontact
34 Moskovskoe shosse, Samara, 443086, Russian Federation
Email: j-bpe@ssau.ru
Phone: +7-846-267-4550
© 2014-2025 J-BPE