Unblackboxing decision making behind artificial intelligence algorithms in intraoperative neurophysiologic monitoring
Date Issued
2024
Author(s)
Wermelinger, Jonathan
Parduzi, Qendresa
Koller, Simon
Schneider, Ulf C.
Raabe, Andreas
Seidel, Kathleen
Type
Article
Language
English
Abstract
Background: We elucidate the decision making that lies behind artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms in the example of muscle classification in intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring (IONM). The goal is to uncover decisive parameters in motor evoked potentials (MEP) to understand intraoperative changes and optimize AI decision making.
Methods: We classified MEP in supratentorial surgery in a bi-centric setup, training on 160 patients from one center and validating on 50 patients from an independent center. We trained random forests (RF), and 1D and 2D convolutional neural nets (CNN) on a total of 37’000 MEPs and uncovered the decision making by looking into the feature importance and gradient class activation maps (Grad-CAM).
Results: The RF achieved 89% test accuracy and 80% accuracy on the validation dataset from the independent center, whereas the 1D CNN achieved 85% test and 76% validation accuracy. Finally, the 2D CNN achieved 86% test and 81% valication accuracy. Inspecting the RF feature importance reveals that the algorithm focuses on the time interval where the potential has highest amplitude. On the other hand, the grad-CAM reveals that the CNNs might be focusing on the biggest slope of the potential.
Conclusions: Analyzing the decision making of artificial intelligence algorithms is an essential part of ensuring the quality and evidence behind the good performances of these methods. Understanding this rationale will be crucial when improving intraoperative MEP alarm criteria. We showed the key features during identification of MEPs and validated the results in a bicentric setup. To our knowledge, it is the first time an IONM machine learning classification task has been implemented in a multicenter set-up.
Methods: We classified MEP in supratentorial surgery in a bi-centric setup, training on 160 patients from one center and validating on 50 patients from an independent center. We trained random forests (RF), and 1D and 2D convolutional neural nets (CNN) on a total of 37’000 MEPs and uncovered the decision making by looking into the feature importance and gradient class activation maps (Grad-CAM).
Results: The RF achieved 89% test accuracy and 80% accuracy on the validation dataset from the independent center, whereas the 1D CNN achieved 85% test and 76% validation accuracy. Finally, the 2D CNN achieved 86% test and 81% valication accuracy. Inspecting the RF feature importance reveals that the algorithm focuses on the time interval where the potential has highest amplitude. On the other hand, the grad-CAM reveals that the CNNs might be focusing on the biggest slope of the potential.
Conclusions: Analyzing the decision making of artificial intelligence algorithms is an essential part of ensuring the quality and evidence behind the good performances of these methods. Understanding this rationale will be crucial when improving intraoperative MEP alarm criteria. We showed the key features during identification of MEPs and validated the results in a bicentric setup. To our knowledge, it is the first time an IONM machine learning classification task has been implemented in a multicenter set-up.
Publisher DOI
Journal or Serie
Brain and Spine
Journal or Serie
Brain and Spine
ISSN
2772-5294
Volume
4
Issue
Suppl. 3
Publisher
Elsevier
Submitter
Sariyar, Murat
Citation apa
Wermelinger, J., Parduzi, Q., Koller, S., Sariyar, M., Schneider, U. C., Raabe, A., & Seidel, K. (2024). Unblackboxing decision making behind artificial intelligence algorithms in intraoperative neurophysiologic monitoring. In Brain and Spine (Vol. 4, Issue Suppl. 3, pp. 171–171). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.24451/dspace/11315
File(s)![Thumbnail Image]()
Loading...
open access
Name
1-s2.0-S2772529424010658-main.pdf
License
Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International
Version
published
Size
494.07 KB
Format
Adobe PDF
Checksum (MD5)
057224f754ee825fdfa9ec5ebc05abf9
