Literature DB >> 16937171

Adaptive certainty-based classification for decomposition of EMG signals.

Sarbast Rasheed1, Daniel Stashuk, Mohamed Kamel.   

Abstract

An adaptive certainty-based supervised classification approach for electromyographic (EMG) signal decomposition is presented and evaluated. Similarity criterion used for grouping motor unit potentials (MUPs) is based on a combination of MUP shapes and two modes of use of motor unit (MU) firing pattern information: passive and active. Performance of the developed classifier was evaluated using synthetic signals of known properties and real signals and compared with the performance of the certainty classifier (CC). Across the sets of simulated and real EMG signals used for comparison, the adaptive certainty classifier (ACC) had both better average performance and lower performance variability. For simulated signals of varying intensity, the ACC had an average correct classification rate (CCr ) of 83.7% with a mean absolute deviation (MAD) of 5.8% compared to 78.3 and 8.7%, respectively, for the CC. For simulated signals with varying amounts of shape and/or firing pattern variability, the ACC had a CCr of 79.7% with a MAD of 4.7% compared to 76.6 and 6.9%, respectively, for the CC. For real signals, the ACC had a CCr of 70.0% with a MAD of 6.3% compared to 64.9 and 6.4%, respectively, for the CC. The test results demonstrate that the ACC can manage both MUP shape variability as well as MU firing pattern variability. The ACC adapts to EMG signal characteristics to create dynamic data driven classification criteria so that the number of MUP assignments made reflects the signal complexity and the number of erroneous assignments is kept sufficiently low. The ability of the ACC to adjust to specific signal characteristics suggests that it can be successfully applied to a wide variety of EMG signals.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16937171     DOI: 10.1007/s11517-006-0033-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput        ISSN: 0140-0118            Impact factor:   2.602


  11 in total

1.  Decomposition and quantitative analysis of clinical electromyographic signals.

Authors:  D W Stashuk
Journal:  Med Eng Phys       Date:  1999 Jul-Sep       Impact factor: 2.242

2.  EMG signal decomposition: how can it be accomplished and used?

Authors:  D Stashuk
Journal:  J Electromyogr Kinesiol       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 2.368

3.  Decomposition-based quantitative electromyography: methods and initial normative data in five muscles.

Authors:  Timothy J Doherty; Daniel W Stashuk
Journal:  Muscle Nerve       Date:  2003-08       Impact factor: 3.217

4.  Physiologically based simulation of clinical EMG signals.

Authors:  Andrew Hamilton-Wright; Daniel W Stashuk
Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 4.538

5.  Robust supervised classification of motor unit action potentials.

Authors:  D Stashuk; G M Paoli
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  1998-01       Impact factor: 2.602

6.  Effect of motor-unit firing time statistics on e.m.g. spectra.

Authors:  P Lago; N B Jones
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  1977-11       Impact factor: 2.602

7.  Relationship of firing intervals of human motor units to the trajectory of post-spike after-hyperpolarization and synaptic noise.

Authors:  P B Matthews
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  1996-04-15       Impact factor: 5.182

8.  Physiology and mathematics of myoelectric signals.

Authors:  C J De Luca
Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng       Date:  1979-06       Impact factor: 4.538

9.  Neuronal spike trains and stochastic point processes. I. The single spike train.

Authors:  D H Perkel; G L Gerstein; G P Moore
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  1967-07       Impact factor: 4.033

10.  Digital low-pass differentiation for biological signal processing.

Authors:  S Usui; I Amidror
Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng       Date:  1982-10       Impact factor: 4.538

View more
  2 in total

1.  Validating motor unit firing patterns extracted by EMG signal decomposition.

Authors:  Hossein Parsaei; Faezeh Jahanmiri Nezhad; Daniel W Stashuk; Andrew Hamilton-Wright
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2010-11-02       Impact factor: 2.602

2.  Comparative evaluation of motor unit architecture models.

Authors:  Javier Navallas; Armando Malanda; Luis Gila; Javier Rodriguez; Ignacio Rodriguez
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2009-08-25       Impact factor: 2.602

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.