A comparison of univariate, vector, bilinear autoregressive, and band power features for brain-computer interfaces.
Selecting suitable feature types is crucial to obtain good overall brain-computer interface performance. Popular feature types include logarithmic band power (logBP), autoregressive (AR) parameters, time-domain parameters, and wavelet-based methods. In this study, we focused on different variants of...
| Publicado en: | Medical & Biological Engineering & Computing Vol. 49; no. 11; pp. 1337 - 1347 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
| Formato: | research Journal Article |
| Publicado: |
Springer Nature
Nov2011
|
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=104595299&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ccm uiTerm: 104595299 longDbName: CINAHL Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: dissinfo: jinfo: jid: 01400118 PO0 jtl: Medical & Biological Engineering & Computing issn: 01400118 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Nov2011 vid: 49 iid: 11 pid: 237 pub: Springer Nature place: New York, New York artinfo: ui: 104595299 104595299 NLM21947797 2011349655 10.1007/s11517-011-0828-x NLM21947797 104595299 ppf: 1337 ppct: 10 formats: fmt: @attributes: type: P tig: atl: A comparison of univariate, vector, bilinear autoregressive, and band power features for brain-computer interfaces. aug: au: Brunner C Billinger M Vidaurre C Neuper C Brunner, Clemens Billinger, Martin Vidaurre, Carmen Neuper, Christa affil: Laboratory of Brain-Computer Interfaces, Institute for Knowledge Discovery, Graz University of Technology, Krenngasse 37, 8010 Graz, Austria sug: subj: Brain Physiology Brain-Computer Interfaces Electroencephalography Methods Imagination ab: Selecting suitable feature types is crucial to obtain good overall brain-computer interface performance. Popular feature types include logarithmic band power (logBP), autoregressive (AR) parameters, time-domain parameters, and wavelet-based methods. In this study, we focused on different variants of AR models and compare performance with logBP features. In particular, we analyzed univariate, vector, and bilinear AR models. We used four-class motor imagery data from nine healthy users over two sessions. We used the first session to optimize parameters such as model order and frequency bands. We then evaluated optimized feature extraction methods on the unseen second session. We found that band power yields significantly higher classification accuracies than AR methods. However, we did not update the bias of the classifiers for the second session in our analysis procedure. When updating the bias at the beginning of a new session, we found no significant differences between all methods anymore. Furthermore, our results indicate that subject-specific optimization is not better than globally optimized parameters. The comparison within the AR methods showed that the vector model is significantly better than both univariate and bilinear variants. Finally, adding the prediction error variance to the feature space significantly improved classification results. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: research Journal Article ougenre: Article language: English refInfo: holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|