This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
Objective. EEG stress classifiers are usually trained and tested on a single dataset, and accuracies above 90% are common in the literature. We asked how much of this performance holds for participants the model has never seen, and for a dataset recorded with other hardware and another stress protocol.Approach. Two open datasets were processed with one pipeline: SAM40 (40 participants; Stroop, arithmetic and mirror-image tasks versus relaxation; 32-channel Emotiv, 128 Hz) and EEGMAT (36 participants; serial subtraction versus rest; 19-channel clinical system, 500 Hz). Four compact classifiers(logistic regression, random forest and RBF-SVM on band power, and a Riemannian tangent-space classifier) were evaluated with leave-one-subject-out (LOSO) validation, with cross-corpus transfer in both directions on ten shared electrodes, and with two unsupervised alignment methods, Riemannian re-centring and CORAL. Main results. Within SAM40, the best LOSO macro-F1 for one stressor against relaxation was 70.3% (best AUROC 0.804). Cross-corpus transfer lowered macro-F1 significantly in 22 of 24 model–direction–stressor settings (pairedWilcoxon test, ???? < 0.01), by up to 37.6 percentage points. Transfer was asymmetric: classifiers trained on EEGMAT reached an AUROC below 0.5 on SAM40 in 9 of 12 settings, so the learned decision direction was reversed. Re-centring improved within-corpus performance (EEGMAT macro-F1 from 0.690 to 0.728) but not transfer, whereas CORAL raised the EEGMAT→SAM40 AUROC of band-power models by 0.04–0.19. Removing ocular components withICA reduced band-power macro-F1 by only 1.1–3.0 points. Significance. Stress labels defined by the task carry protocol-specific information that does not survive a change of dataset. Cross-corpus testing should come before any claim that an EEG stress detector is ready for everyday or biofeedback use.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mengdigali et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: