4.6 Article

FoGGAN: Generating Realistic Parkinson's Disease Freezing of Gait Data Using GANs

期刊

SENSORS
卷 23, 期 19, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/s23198158

关键词

Parkinson's Disease; freezing of gait (FoG); GAN; DNN; artificial intelligence (AI)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Data scarcity is a major challenge for artificial intelligence in healthcare. This study proposes a data augmentation solution using Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs) to generate synthetic data that is almost identical to the original data. The experiment conducted on a freezing of gait (FoG) symptom dataset demonstrates the effectiveness of this solution in alleviating the data shortage issue.
Data scarcity in the healthcare domain is a major drawback for most state-of-the-art technologies engaging artificial intelligence. The unavailability of quality data due to both the difficulty to gather and label them as well as due to their sensitive nature create a breeding ground for data augmentation solutions. Parkinson's Disease (PD) which can have a wide range of symptoms including motor impairments consists of a very challenging case for quality data acquisition. Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs) can help alleviate such data availability issues. In this light, this study focuses on a data augmentation solution engaging Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs) using a freezing of gait (FoG) symptom dataset as input. The data generated by the so-called FoGGAN architecture presented in this study are almost identical to the original as concluded by a variety of similarity metrics. This highlights the significance of such solutions as they can provide credible synthetically generated data which can be utilized as training dataset inputs to AI applications. Additionally, a DNN classifier's performance is evaluated using three different evaluation datasets and the accuracy results were quite encouraging, highlighting that the FOGGAN solution could lead to the alleviation of the data shortage matter.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据