Deception Detection from Five-Channel Wearable EEG on LieWaves: A Reproducible Baseline for Subject-Dependent and Subject-Independent Evaluation
HighlightsWhat are the main findings?We evaluate deception detection from five-channel wearable EEG on the public LieWaves dataset (27 subjects, Emotiv Insight headset) under both subject-dependent (same-subject) and subject-independent (cross-subject) protocols.In the subject-independent configuration, a compact ResNet-SE model trained on raw overlapping windows and evaluated with a single session-level decision threshold estimated from cross-validated scores attains 66.70% session-level accuracy (AUC = 57.80%) on subjects not seen by the model that predicts them.In the subject-dependent configuration, an overlapping short-window Res-TCN-SE-Attention model that fuses raw EEG with DWT-based spectral and handcrafted band-power and Hjorth features reaches 99.94% window-level accuracy on held-out windows from held-out sessions of the same individuals under a heavily overlapping, subject-dependent but session-disjoint split. This near-ceiling window-level figure should be interpreted only as an optimistic upper bound in an autocorrelated, subject-dependent regime, and not as an estimate of deployment-relevant deception-detection ability.What are the implications of the main findings?Five-channel wearable EEG thus carries modest but above-chance information for lie–truth discrimination in cross-subject settings, suggesting that portable screening might be technically feasible only in tightly controlled scenarios. At the same time, the pronounced generalization gap between subject-dependent and subject-independent models underscores that substantial additional work on robustness, calibration, and external validation is required before real-world deployment.By making our subject-wise splits, windowing rules, decision thresholds, and session-level aggregation explicit, we provide a concrete, reproducible benchmark for five-channel wearable EEG deception detection and highlight the need for standardized, clearly reported evaluation protocols.Deception detection with low-channel wearable EEG requires protocols that generalize across people while remaining practical for portable devices. Using the public LieWaves dataset (27 subjects recorded with a five-channel Emotiv Insight headset), we evaluate to what extent five-channel head-mounted EEG can support lie–truth discrimination under both subject-independent and subject-dependent evaluations. For the subject-independent setting, we train a compact Residual Network with Squeeze-and-Excitation blocks (ResNet-SE) model on raw overlapping windows with focal loss, light data augmentation, and grouped cross-validation by subject; out-of-fold window probabilities are averaged per session and converted to labels using a single decision threshold estimated from the cross-validated session scores. For the subject-dependent setting, we adopt an overlapping short-window Residual Temporal Convolutional Network with Squeeze-and-Excitation and Attention (Res-TCN-SE-Attention) model that fuses raw EEG with discrete wavelet transform (DWT)-based spectral and handcrafted band-power and Hjorth features, using an 80/10/10 split at the recording/session level (stratified by session label), so that all windows from a given session are assigned to a single subset; because each subject contributes two sessions, the same subject may still appear across subsets via different sessions. The subject-independent model attains 66.70% session-level accuracy with an AUC of 0.58 on unseen subjects, underscoring the difficulty of person-independent generalization from low-channel wearable EEG. Because practical deployment requires generalization to previously unseen individuals, we treat the subject-independent evaluation as the primary estimate of real-world generalization. In contrast, the subject-dependent pipeline reaches 99.94% window-level accuracy under the overlapping sliding-window (OSW) setting with a session-disjoint split (no session contributes windows to more than one subset). This near-ceiling performance reflects the optimistic nature of subject-dependent evaluation with highly overlapping windows, even when avoiding within-session train–test overlap, and should not be interpreted as a meaningful indicator of deception-detection capability under realistic deployment constraints. These results suggest limited, above-chance separability between lie and truth sessions in LieWaves using a five-channel wearable EEG under the studied protocol; however, performance remains far from deployment-ready and is strongly shaped by evaluation design. Explicit reporting of both protocols, together with clear rules for windowing, aggregation, and threshold selection, supports more reproducible and comparable benchmarking.
Read more