THE EFFECT OF USING HAMMING WINDOW AND LINEAR PREDICTIVE CODING MODEL IN EEG-P300 SIGNALS CLASSIFICATION

Authors

  • Ali Momennezhad
  • Mousa Shamsi
  • Hossein Ebrahimnezhad
  • Lida Asgharian

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.47839/ijc.14.2.806

Keywords:

EEG signal, LPC, BCI system, Fisher linear discriminant analysis (FLDA), P300, Hamming window.

Abstract

In this paper, Fisher linear discriminant analysis (FLDA) is used to classify the EEGP-300 signals which are extracted from brain activities. In this case, at first the preprocessing algorithms such as filtering and referencing are applied to the raw EEG signal. Then, in order to create a model out of the signal, a linear predictive coding model with 6 order is used. So that the signal is reconstructed by extracting linear predictive coding (LPC) model parameters of each single trial, and then every signal trial is passed through the Hamming window by length 9. At last Fisher Linear Discriminant Analysis is used for classifying. In this paper, classification accuracy, the maximum bit rate and the convergence time to achieve stability in maximum accuracy of classification are computed to compare performance of the proposed method, Fisher Linear Discriminant Analysis with Linear Predictive Coding Model and Hamming Window (LPC+HAMMING+FLDA), to FLDA and LPC+FLDA. The implementation results show that the efficiency of the proposed method in terms of classification accuracy and convergence time to achieve stability in maximum accuracy is better than the other two mentioned algorithms. As example, at the proposed algorithm with 8 electrode configuration the S2 converges to the maximum accuracy after eleventh Block while this happens for two other algorithms after fourteenth Block and the total classification accuracy for this person at proposed algorithm is improved as 2.2% and 4% than respectively LPC+FLDA and FLDA algorithms.

References

S. Sanei and J. A. Chambers, EEG Signal Processing, Wiley, 2008.

F. Cabestaing, T. M. Vaughan, et al, Classification of evoked potentials by Pearson's correlation in a brain-computer interface, AMSE, Modelling C Automatic Control (theory and applications), (67) (2007), pp. 156-166.

N. A. Khemri, P300 Wave Detection using a Commercial Non-invasive EEG Sensor, Reliability and Performance in Control Applications, Master Thesis, Oklahoma State University, 2012.

J. R. Wolpaw, N. Birbaumer, et al., Brain-computer interfaces for communication and control, Clinical Neurophysiology, (113) 6 (2002), pp. 767-791.

U. Hoffmann, J.-M. Vesin, et al., An efficient P300-based brain-computer interface for disabled subjects, Journal of Neuroscience Methods, (167) 1 (2008), pp. 115-125.

M. Wessel, Pioneering Research into Brain Computer Interfaces, Thesis, Delft University of Technology, 2006.

A. R. Cabrera, Feature extraction and classification for Brain-Computer Interfaces, Aalborg: Aalborg University, Denmark, 2009.

A. Bakhshi and A. Ahmadifard, A comparison among classification accuracy of neural network, FLDA and BLDA in P 300-based BCI system, International Journal of Computer Applications, (46) 19 (2012), pp. 11-15.

H. Zhang, C. Guan, et al., Asynchronous P300-based brain--computer interfaces: A computational approach with statistical models, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering, (55) 6 (2008), pp. 1754-1763.

N. Birbaumer, Breaking the silence: brain–computer interfaces (BCI) for communication and motor control, Psychophysiology, (43) 6 (2006), pp. 517-532.

M. Donnerer and A. Steed, Using a P300 brain-computer interface in an immersive virtual environment, Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, (19) 1 (2010), pp. 12-24.

R. Stanny, Mapping the Event Related Potentials of the Brain: Theoretical Issues, Technical Considerations, and Computer Programs, DTIC Document,1988.

K. Pearson, LIII. On lines and planes of closest fit to systems of points in space, The London, Edinburgh, and Dublin Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science, (2) 11 (1901), pp. 559-572.

A. Hyvärinen and E. Oja, Independent component analysis: algorithms and applications, Neural Networks, (13) 4 (2000), pp. 411-430.

J. Müller-Gerking, G. Pfurtscheller, et al., Designing optimal spatial filters for single-trial EEG classification in a movement task, Clinical Neurophysiology, (110) 5 (1999), pp. 787-798.

Y. Wang, P. Berg, et al., Common spatial subspace decomposition applied to analysis of brain responses under multiple task conditions: a simulation study, Clinical Neurophysiology, (110) 4 (1999), pp. 604-614.

U. Hoffmann, A. Yazdani, et al., Bayesian feature selection applied in a P300 brain-computer interface, in Proceedings of the 16th European Signal Processing Conference, 2008.

L. Breiman, Arcing classifier (with discussion and a rejoinder by the author), The Annals of Statistics, (26) 3 (1998), pp. 801-849.

D. Trad, S. Helmy, et al., Hidden Markov models and support vector machines applied to P300 Based Brain-Computer Interface – a Comparative study, in Proceedings of ICTA, 2009.

L. R. Rabiner and R. W. Schafer, Digital processing of speech signals, IET, 1979.

U. Hoffmann, Bayesian Machine Learning Applied in a Brain-computer Interface for Disabled Users, École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, 2007.

Downloads

Published

2015-06-30

How to Cite

Momennezhad, A., Shamsi, M., Ebrahimnezhad, H., & Asgharian, L. (2015). THE EFFECT OF USING HAMMING WINDOW AND LINEAR PREDICTIVE CODING MODEL IN EEG-P300 SIGNALS CLASSIFICATION. International Journal of Computing, 14(2), 97-106. https://doi.org/10.47839/ijc.14.2.806

Issue

Section

Articles