4.6 Article

A system for automatic artifact removal in ictal scalp EEG based on independent component analysis and Bayesian classification

期刊

CLINICAL NEUROPHYSIOLOGY
卷 117, 期 4, 页码 912-927

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.clinph.2005.12.013

关键词

EEG; seizure; artifacts; automatic; independent component analysis; Bayesian classifiers

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To devise an automated system to remove artifacts from ictal scalp EEG, using independent component analysis (ICA). Methods: A Bayesian classifier was used to determine the probability that 2 s epochs of seizure segments decomposed by ICA represented EEG activity, as opposed to artifact. The classifier was trained using numerous statistical, spectral, and spatial features. The system's performance was then assessed using separate validation data. Results: The classifier identified epochs representing EEG activity in the validation dataset with a sensitivity of 82.4% and a specificity of 83.3%. An ICA component was considered to represent EEG activity if the sum of the probabilities that its epochs represented EEG exceeded a threshold predetermined using the training data. Otherwise, the component represented artifact. Using this threshold on the validation set, the identification of EEG components was performed with a sensitivity of 87.6% and a specificity of 70.2%. Most misclassified components were a mixture of EEG and artifactual activity. Conclusions: The automated system successfully rejected a good proportion of artifactual components extracted by ICA, while preserving almost all EEG components. The misclassification rate was comparable to the variability observed in human classification. Significance: Current ICA methods of artifact removal require a tedious visual classification of the components. The proposed system automates this process and removes simultaneously multiple types of artifacts. (c) 2006 International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

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