Home › Research › Digital health tools
EEG Pathology Detection via Clinical Concept Bottleneck Models
Radwan M, Lind PG, Yazidi A.. bioRxiv, 2026-10-11
Topic: Brain imaging, connectivity and assessment
A bstract Deep learning models for electroencephalography (EEG) pathology detection achieve competitive accuracy but offer limited interpretability. In this paper, we introduce concept bottleneck models (CBMs) for EEG pathology detection which use clinical EEG biomarkers computed analytically from the signal as a bottleneck to be used for prediction. Those concepts include band power, spectral ratios, alpha peak frequency and amplitude, hemispheric asymmetry and phase locking values. With the backbone based on shallow convolutional neural network (CNN), we compare a black box baseline with two variants of CBMs. The hybrid variant is a classifier receives a residual projection of the backbone features. The pure variant is a CBM where the classifier receives only the predicted concepts. Models are evaluated on abnormality detection and dementia classification followed by concept prediction quality and leakage analysis. Both CBMs approach the baseline on TUAB (82.7–82.9% vs 83.6%) and are 2–5 percentage points lower on CAUEEG (57.9–60.5% vs 62.7%). The pure CBM exhibits concept fidelity concern where the predicted concepts deviate from their ground truth values. Replacing them with their true values causes severe cost on accuracy by 26 and 22 points on TUAB and CAUEEG. The concept fidelity concern is mitigated by increasing the weight of the concept loss to match the ground truth concepts. the mitigation comes with small accuracy cost on TUAB but a relatively larger cost on CAUEEG. The code of the experiments and full logs are available at https://www.github.com/mhmdrdwn/cbm .
Key findings
- Both CBMs approach the baseline on TUAB (82.7–82.9% vs 83.6%) and are 2–5 percentage points lower on CAUEEG (57.9–60.5% vs 62.7%).
- The pure CBM exhibits concept fidelity concern where the predicted concepts deviate from their ground truth values.
- Replacing them with their true values causes severe cost on accuracy by 26 and 22 points on TUAB and CAUEEG.
- The concept fidelity concern is mitigated by increasing the weight of the concept loss to match the ground truth concepts. the mitigation comes with small accuracy cost on TUAB but a relatively larger cost on CAUEEG.
- The code of the experiments and full logs are available at https://www.github.com/mhmdrdwn/cbm .
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Digital health →
Study details
- Effect size82.9%; 83.6%; 60.5%
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 16/100
Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed. It scored 24 on the same rubric, but non-peer-reviewed sources are capped at 16, so it shows as 16. Scored zero for study design, sample size, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 15 of the 62 points we could judge it on, which is 24 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 2 / 10 | Tier 4 — not a peer-reviewed journal (bioRxiv) |
| Journal's citation record | 0 / 4 | Not a journal article, so the journal's record does not count |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 4 / 10 | Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed. Hosted on a preprint server. |
| How recent | 5 / 5 | 2026 — within 1 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 2 / 3 | Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multi-centre collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 1 / 2 | Not in PubMed, but has a DOI |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 15 / 62 | Scored on 12 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 15 of the 62 points we could judge it on is 24 out of 100. |
| Total | 24 / 100 | Capped to 16 because this is not a peer-reviewed article. |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
APA 7th
Radwan, M., Lind, P. G., & Yazidi, A. (2026). EEG Pathology Detection via Clinical Concept Bottleneck Models. bioRxiv. https://doi.org/10.64898/2026.10.04.756607
Vancouver
Radwan M, Lind PG, Yazidi A. EEG Pathology Detection via Clinical Concept Bottleneck Models. bioRxiv. 2026. doi:10.64898/2026.10.04.756607.
BibTeX
@article{radwan2026-cccc408d,
author = {Radwan, M. and Lind, P. G. and Yazidi, A.},
title = {{EEG Pathology Detection via Clinical Concept Bottleneck Models}},
journal = {bioRxiv},
year = {2026},
doi = {10.64898/2026.10.04.756607},
url = {https://doi.org/10.64898/2026.10.04.756607}
}
Related studies in Digital health tools
Also tagged “convolutional”
205 studies in the library carry the topic tag “convolutional”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 205 tagged studies.