Evaluates semi-supervised EEG-based emotion recognition under extreme label scarcity. It probes the model's ability to leverage unlabeled data via representation alignment while maintaining classification performance across subject-dependent and subject-independent protocols. Use when the user wants to benchmark on SEED, SEED-IV, SEED-V, AMIGOS, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports accuracy.
Scanned 9/11/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add qhjqhj00/research-skills-pool --skill eeg-ssl-emotion-eval --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Eeg Ssl Emotion Eval?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-eeg-ssl-emotion-eval)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: eeg-ssl-emotion-eval
description: Evaluates semi-supervised EEG-based emotion recognition under extreme label scarcity. It probes the model's ability to leverage unlabeled data via representation alignment while maintaining classification performance across subject-dependent and subject-independent protocols. Use when the user wants to benchmark on SEED, SEED-IV, SEED-V, AMIGOS, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports accuracy.
metadata:
skill_kind: dataset_eval
source_arxiv: 2202.05400
bibtex_key: zhang2022parse
confidence: high
---
# eeg-ssl-emotion-eval
> PARSE: Pairwise Alignment of Representations in Semi-Supervised EEG Learning for Emotion Recognition — Zhang et al. (2022) (arXiv:2202.05400, 2022)
## What this evaluates
Evaluates semi-supervised EEG-based emotion recognition under extreme label scarcity. It probes the model's ability to leverage unlabeled data via representation alignment while maintaining classification performance across subject-dependent and subject-independent protocols.
## Datasets
- **SEED** — total ?; splits: train (9), test (6)
- **SEED-IV** — total ?; splits: train (16), test (8)
- **SEED-V** — total ?; splits: train (5), val (5), test (5)
- **AMIGOS** — total ?; splits: train (-1), test (-1)
## Metrics
- `accuracy` **(primary)** — range: [0, 1]
- Ratio of correctly predicted instances to the total number of instances. Computed per subject-dependent fold.
- `F1-score` — range: [0, 1]
- Macro-averaged F1-score across all classes. Harmonic mean of precision and recall per class, then averaged. Used for the imbalanced AMIGOS dataset.
## Input / output format
**Input**: 1-D feature vectors extracted from EEG segments. For SEED-series: Differential Entropy across 5 bands (delta, theta, alpha, beta, gamma) from 62 channels, reshaped and min-max normalized to [0,1]. For AMIGOS: Log-PSD across 5 bands + asymmetry from 14 channels, reshaped and normalized to [0,1].
**Output**: Discrete class predictions (3 classes for SEED/IV, 5 classes for SEED-V, 2 classes for AMIGOS valence/arousal).
## Scoring recipe
```python
def compute_metric(predictions, gold, metric_type):
if metric_type == 'accuracy':
return sum(p == g for p, g in zip(predictions, gold)) / len(gold)
elif metric_type == 'f1':
classes = sorted(set(gold))
f1s = []
for c in classes:
tp = sum(p == c and g == c for p, g in zip(predictions, gold))
fp = sum(p == c and g != c for p, g in zip(predictions, gold))
fn = sum(p != c and g == c for p, g in zip(predictions, gold))
prec = tp / (tp + fp) if (tp + fp) > 0 else 0
rec = tp / (tp + fn) if (tp + fn) > 0 else 0
f1 = 2 * prec * rec / (prec + rec) if (prec + rec) > 0 else 0
f1s.append(f1)
return sum(f1s) / len(f1s)
```
## Common pitfalls
- Applying accuracy instead of macro F1-score for the highly imbalanced AMIGOS dataset, which violates the paper's explicit protocol.
- Mixing subject-dependent and subject-independent evaluation splits (SEED-series use fixed trial splits per participant, AMIGOS uses leave-one-participant-out).
- Failing to vary the number of labeled samples per class (m ∈ {1,3,5,7,10,25}) when reporting semi-supervised results, as the protocol requires evaluation across multiple label scarcity levels.
## Evidence (verbatim from paper)
> Since the class distributions are almost balanced in the SEED-series datasets, accuracy is selected as the evaluation metric. In AMIGOS, we adopt the same leave-one-participant-out protocol for training and testing data splits... As the class distribution is very imbalanced, we use the F1-score (mean F1-score for both classes) as the evaluation metric as suggested in [13].
## Citation
```bibtex
@misc{zhang2022parse,
title={PARSE: Pairwise Alignment of Representations in Semi-Supervised EEG Learning for Emotion Recognition},
author={Zhang et al. (2022)},
year={2022},
note={arXiv:2202.05400}
}
```
- arXiv: 2202.05400
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!