Dissecting unsupervised learning through hidden Markov modelling in electrophysiological data
Laura MasaracchiaiD, Felipe FredesiD, Mark W. WoolrichiD, Diego VidaurreiD
Abstract
Unsupervised, data-driven methods are commonly used in neuroscience to automatically decompose data into interpretable patterns. These patterns differ from one another depending on the assumptions of the models. How these assumptions affect specific data decompositions in practice, however, is often unclear, which hinders model applicability and interpretability. For instance, the hidden Markov model (HMM) automatically detects characteristic, recurring activity patterns (so-called states) from time series data. States are defined by a certain probability distribution, whose state-specific parameters are estimated from the data. But what specific features, from all of those that the data contain, do the states capture? That depends on the choice of probability distribution and on other model hyperparameters. Using both synthetic and real data, we aim at better characterizing the behavior of two HMM types that can be applied to electrophysiological data. Specifically, we study which differences in data features (such as frequency, amplitude or signal-to-noise ratio) are more salient to the models and therefore more likely to drive the state decomposition. Overall, we aim at providing guidance for an appropriate use of this type of analysis on one or two-channel neural electrophysiological data, and an informed interpretation of its results given the characteristics of the data and the purpose of the analysis. NEW & NOTEWORTHYCompared to classical supervised methods, unsupervised methods of analysis have the advantage to be freer of subjective biases. However, it is not always clear what aspects of the data these methods are most sensitive to, which complicates interpretation. Focusing on the Hidden Markov Model, commonly used to describe electrophysiological data, we explore in detail the nature of its estimates through simulations and real data examples, providing important insights about what to expect from these models.
02 /Specification & Classification
Click any tag to browse matching papers- Citations
- 15
- FWCI
- 1.41
- Field percentile
- top 18%
- Assay
- Research Focus
- Approach
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- The discrete logic of the Brain - Explicit modelling of Brain State durations in EEG and MEG
Nelson J. Trujillo‐Barreto, David Araya, Wael El‐Deredy·bioRxiv·May 10, 2019
- Hierarchical Semi-Markov Smooth Models of Latent Neural States
Joshua Krause, Jacolien van Rij, Jelmer P. Borst·bioRxiv·Apr 20, 2026
- Microstates and power envelope hidden Markov modeling probe bursting brain activity at different timescales
Nicolas Coquelet, Xavier De Tiège, … Vincent Wens·NeuroImagePeer-reviewed·Dec 22, 2021
- Canonical Hidden Markov Model Networks for Studying M/EEG
Chetan Gohil, Rukuang Huang, … Mark W. Woolrich·Imaging NeurosciencePeer-reviewed·Jan 1, 2026
- Automatic decomposition of electrophysiological data into distinct non-sinusoidal oscillatory modes
Marco S. Fabus, Andrew J. Quinn, … Mark W. Woolrich·Journal of NeurophysiologyPeer-reviewed·Oct 6, 2021
- A sticky Poisson Hidden Markov Model for solving the problem of over-segmentation and rapid state switching in cortical datasets
Tianshu Li, Giancarlo La Camera·PLoS ONEPeer-reviewed·Jul 1, 2025