↓ Skip to main content

Hierarchical Event Descriptors (HED): Semi-Structured Tagging for Real-World Events in Large-Scale EEG

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroinformatics, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Readers on

mendeley
34 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Hierarchical Event Descriptors (HED): Semi-Structured Tagging for Real-World Events in Large-Scale EEG
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroinformatics, October 2016
DOI 10.3389/fninf.2016.00042
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nima Bigdely-Shamlo, Jeremy Cockfield, Scott Makeig, Thomas Rognon, Chris La Valle, Makoto Miyakoshi, Kay A. Robbins

Abstract

Real-world brain imaging by EEG requires accurate annotation of complex subject-environment interactions in event-rich tasks and paradigms. This paper describes the evolution of the Hierarchical Event Descriptor (HED) system for systematically describing both laboratory and real-world events. HED version 2, first described here, provides the semantic capability of describing a variety of subject and environmental states. HED descriptions can include stimulus presentation events on screen or in virtual worlds, experimental or spontaneous events occurring in the real world environment, and events experienced via one or multiple sensory modalities. Furthermore, HED 2 can distinguish between the mere presence of an object and its actual (or putative) perception by a subject. Although the HED framework has implicit ontological and linked data representations, the user-interface for HED annotation is more intuitive than traditional ontological annotation. We believe that hiding the formal representations allows for a more user-friendly interface, making consistent, detailed tagging of experimental, and real-world events possible for research users. HED is extensible while retaining the advantages of having an enforced common core vocabulary. We have developed a collection of tools to support HED tag assignment and validation; these are available at hedtags.org. A plug-in for EEGLAB (sccn.ucsd.edu/eeglab), CTAGGER, is also available to speed the process of tagging existing studies.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 3%
Unknown 33 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 32%
Researcher 5 15%
Professor 2 6%
Other 2 6%
Student > Postgraduate 2 6%
Other 4 12%
Unknown 8 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 9 26%
Engineering 5 15%
Psychology 4 12%
Computer Science 3 9%
Social Sciences 1 3%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 9 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 November 2016.
All research outputs
#13,407,768
of 22,893,031 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroinformatics
#431
of 751 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#164,620
of 315,552 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroinformatics
#6
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,893,031 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 751 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.3. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 315,552 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.