4.6 Article

FCAN-XGBoost: A Novel Hybrid Model for EEG Emotion Recognition

期刊

SENSORS
卷 23, 期 12, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/s23125680

关键词

EEG; emotion recognition; feature fusion; FANet; FCAN-XGBoost

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, a novel EEG emotion recognition algorithm called FCAN-XGBoost is proposed, which achieves accurate classification of four emotions by combining FCAN and XGBoost algorithms. The proposed method achieves emotion recognition accuracies of 95.26% and 94.05% on the DEAP and DREAMER datasets, respectively, while reducing computation time by at least 75.45% and memory occupation by 67.51%.
In recent years, artificial intelligence (AI) technology has promoted the development of electroencephalogram (EEG) emotion recognition. However, existing methods often overlook the computational cost of EEG emotion recognition, and there is still room for improvement in the accuracy of EEG emotion recognition. In this study, we propose a novel EEG emotion recognition algorithm called FCAN-XGBoost, which is a fusion of two algorithms, FCAN and XGBoost. The FCAN module is a feature attention network (FANet) that we have proposed for the first time, which processes the differential entropy (DE) and power spectral density (PSD) features extracted from the four frequency bands of the EEG signal and performs feature fusion and deep feature extraction. Finally, the deep features are fed into the eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) algorithm to classify the four emotions. We evaluated the proposed method on the DEAP and DREAMER datasets and achieved a four-category emotion recognition accuracy of 95.26% and 94.05%, respectively. Additionally, our proposed method reduces the computational cost of EEG emotion recognition by at least 75.45% for computation time and 67.51% for memory occupation. The performance of FCAN-XGBoost outperforms the state-of-the-art four-category model and reduces computational costs without losing classification performance compared with other models.

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