<!DOCTYPE art SYSTEM 'http://www.biomedcentral.com/xml/article.dtd'>
<art>
<ui>1471-2202-14-S1-P62</ui>
<ji>1471-2202</ji>
<fm>
<dochead>Poster presentation</dochead>
<bibl>
<title><p>Parameter optimization of logistic regression classifiers</p></title>
<aug>
<au ca="yes" id="A1"><snm>Sherwin</snm><mi>S</mi><fnm>Jason</fnm><insr iid="I1"/><insr iid="I2"/><email>jason.sherwin@columbia.edu</email></au>
<au id="A2"><snm>Chartier</snm><fnm>Josh</fnm><insr iid="I3"/></au>
</aug>
<insg>
<ins id="I1"><p>Department of Biomedical Engineering, Columbia University, New York, NY 10025, USA</p></ins>
<ins id="I2"><p>Human Research and Engineering Directorate, U.S. Army Aberdeen Proving Ground, Aberdeen, MD 21005, USA</p></ins>
<ins id="I3"><p>Department of Biomedical Engineering, Rice University, Houston, TX 77005, USA</p></ins>
</insg>
<source>BMC Neuroscience</source>


<supplement><title><p>Abstracts from the Twenty Second Annual Computational Neuroscience Meeting: CNS*2013</p></title><note>Meeting abstracts</note></supplement><conference><title><p>Twenty Second Annual Computational Neuroscience Meeting: CNS*2013</p></title><location>Paris, France</location><date-range>13-18 July 2013</date-range><url>http://www.cnsorg.org/cns-2013-paris</url></conference><issn>1471-2202</issn>
<pubdate>2013</pubdate>
<volume>14</volume>
<issue>Suppl 1</issue>
<fpage>P62</fpage>
<url>http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2202/14/S1/P62</url>
<xrefbib><pubid idtype="doi">10.1186/1471-2202-14-S1-P62</pubid></xrefbib></bibl>
<history><pub><date><day>8</day><month>7</month><year>2013</year></date></pub></history>
<cpyrt><year>2013</year><collab>Sherwin and Chartier; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.</collab><note>This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (<url>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0</url>), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.</note></cpyrt>
</fm>
<bdy>
<sec><st><p/></st>
<p>Logistic regression (LR) classifiers have been used successfully in the single-trial analysis of EEG data, especially in tasks of perceptual decision-making <abbrgrp><abbr bid="B1">1</abbr><abbr bid="B2">2</abbr></abbrgrp>, but heuristics govern the choices for classifier parameters, such as window size (&#948;). Furthermore, no rigorous definition exists as to the number of epochs (N) of either class that would allow sufficient classifier training before testing using leave-one-out cross-validation. Here, we attempt to address these issues by exploring this discrete parameter space with the aid of a genetic algorithm. In doing so, we draw preliminary conclusions on both subject-specific and subject-general trends of these classifiers.</p>
<p>To establish a baseline for comparison, we utilize EEG data from a previous study using LR to classify neural response to a two-choice forced-decision face vs. car visual task <abbrgrp><abbr bid="B1">1</abbr></abbrgrp>. In this study, a window size (&#948;) of 60 ms was used to segment epochs for classification. Other studies using this technique also employ a comparable window size <abbrgrp><abbr bid="B2">2</abbr><abbr bid="B3">3</abbr></abbrgrp>, even though &#948; has the potential to drastically affect classifier training and performance. Similarly, the number of epochs used to train the classifier can greatly affect its performance, a number too low causing an insufficient number of points through which a dividing hyperplane can be found.</p>
<p>Recognizing the dependence of classifier performance on these discrete parameters, we use a genetic algorithm to explore the &#948; vs. N design space. In doing so, we track an objective function whose value depends on maximizing an epoch window's leave-one-out A<sub>z </sub>(area under receiver-operating characteristic) value while decreasing its variability (determined from bootstrapping), which increases with a low number of epochs. Once converging to subject-specific values of &#948;* and N*, we then test the classifier solution for statistical significance using the false discovery rate across all windows <abbrgrp><abbr bid="B4">4</abbr></abbrgrp>, as there are approximately E/2&#948;* multiple comparisons for an E milliseconds epoch with 50% window overlap.</p>
<p>First, minimizing our objective function with N held constant at its maximum, we find that &#948;* can be tuned in a subject-specific way and we find on average a 3.7 &#177; 1.1% improvement in maximum A<sub>z </sub>from that of the earlier study. Second, we vary &#948; (&#948; &#8712; [5, 6, ..., 149, 150]ms) and N (N &#8712; [10, 11, ..., N<sub>max</sub>-1, N<sub>max</sub>] ) simultaneously and converge using a genetic algorithm (6-bit resolution, 36-member population, 0.7 crossover probability, 0.7/(population size) mutation probability, <abbrgrp><abbr bid="B5">5</abbr></abbrgrp>) to a subject-specific &#948;* and N*. In each subject but one we find that N* &lt; N<sub>max </sub>and that &#948;* is a subject-specific parameter that differs from the heuristics offered by previous work. Finally, on a group level, we find that the components of our objective function exhibit distinct variation with respect to &#948; and N, with an epoch's maximum A<sub>z </sub>optimizing for low N and low &#948;, while its A<sub>z </sub>variability minimizes for high N and maximizes for low N, nearly irrespective of &#948;.</p>
</sec>
</bdy>
<bm>
<refgrp><bibl id="B1"><title><p>Temporal characterization of the neural correlates of perceptual decision making in the human brain</p></title><aug><au><snm>Philiastides</snm><fnm>MG</fnm></au><au><snm>Sajda</snm><fnm>P</fnm></au></aug><source>Cereb Cortex</source><pubdate>2006</pubdate><volume>16</volume><issue>4</issue><fpage>509</fpage><lpage>518</lpage><xrefbib><pubid idtype="pmpid" link="fulltext">16014865</pubid></xrefbib></bibl><bibl id="B2"><title><p>Single-trial discrimination for integrating simultaneous EEG and fMRI: identifying cortical areas contributing to trial-to-trial variability in the auditory oddball task</p></title><aug><au><snm>Goldman</snm><fnm>RI</fnm></au><au><snm>Wei</snm><fnm>CY</fnm></au><au><snm>Philiastides</snm><fnm>MG</fnm></au><au><snm>Gerson</snm><fnm>AD</fnm></au><au><snm>Friedman</snm><fnm>D</fnm></au><au><snm>Brown</snm><fnm>TR</fnm></au><au><snm>Sajda</snm><fnm>P</fnm></au></aug><source>NeuroImage</source><pubdate>2009</pubdate><volume>47</volume><issue>1</issue><fpage>136</fpage><lpage>147</lpage><xrefbib><pubidlist><pubid idtype="doi">10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.03.062</pubid><pubid idtype="pmcid">2789455</pubid><pubid idtype="pmpid" link="fulltext">19345734</pubid></pubidlist></xrefbib></bibl><bibl id="B3"><title><p>You can't think and hit at the same time: Neural correlates of baseball pitch classification</p></title><aug><au><snm>Sherwin</snm><fnm>J</fnm></au><au><snm>Muraskin</snm><fnm>J</fnm></au><au><snm>Sajda</snm><fnm>P</fnm></au></aug><source>Frontiers of Neuroscience</source><pubdate>2012</pubdate><volume>6</volume><issue>177</issue></bibl><bibl id="B4"><title><p>Controlling the fasle discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing</p></title><aug><au><snm>Benjamini</snm><fnm>Y</fnm></au><au><snm>Hochberg</snm><fnm>Y</fnm></au></aug><source>Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B (Methodological)</source><pubdate>1995</pubdate><volume>57</volume><issue>1</issue><fpage>289</fpage><lpage>300</lpage></bibl><bibl id="B5"><title><p>Multiobjective robust control using evolutionary algorithms</p></title><aug><au><snm>Chipperfield</snm><fnm>J</fnm></au><au><snm>Dakev</snm><fnm>NV</fnm></au><au><snm>Fleming</snm><fnm>PJ</fnm></au><au><snm>Whidborne</snm><fnm>JF</fnm></au></aug><source>Proceedings of the Ieee International Conference on Industrial Technology (Icit'96)</source><pubdate>1994</pubdate><fpage>269</fpage><lpage>273</lpage></bibl></refgrp>
</bm>
</art>