| Literature DB >> 22924060 |
Ashwin Belle1, Rosalyn Hobson Hargraves, Kayvan Najarian.
Abstract
This research proposes to develop a monitoring system which uses Electrocardiograph (ECG) as a fundamental physiological signal, to analyze and predict the presence or lack of cognitive attention in individuals during a task execution. The primary focus of this study is to identify the correlation between fluctuating level of attention and its implications on the cardiac rhythm recorded in the ECG. Furthermore, Electroencephalograph (EEG) signals are also analyzed and classified for use as a benchmark for comparison with ECG analysis. Several advanced signal processing techniques have been implemented and investigated to derive multiple clandestine and informative features from both these physiological signals. Decomposition and feature extraction are done using Stockwell-transform for the ECG signal, while Discrete Wavelet Transform (DWT) is used for EEG. These features are then applied to various machine-learning algorithms to produce classification models that are capable of differentiating between the cases of a person being attentive and a person not being attentive. The presented results show that detection and classification of cognitive attention using ECG are fairly comparable to EEG.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22924060 PMCID: PMC3424596 DOI: 10.1155/2012/528781
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Comput Math Methods Med ISSN: 1748-670X Impact factor: 2.238
Figure 1Two leads ECG collection from Armband.
Figure 2Methodology overview.
Figure 3ECG preprocessing.
Figure 4EEG preprocessing steps.
Figure 5S-Transform application on ECG signal.
Figure 6(a) shows the contour-based visualization of frequency spectrum along time, based on the S-transform of the signal window. (b) shows the original signal window.
Figure 7EEG decomposition and analysis steps using wavelet transform.
Figure 8(a) “COIF3” wavelet, (b) “DB4” wavelet, and (c) “BOIR3.9” wavelet.
S-transform feature classification results of ECG.
|
| Accuracy (average) | Specificity (average) | Sensitivity (average) |
|---|---|---|---|
| C4.5 | 74.22% | 67.31% | 81.13% |
| Classification via regression | 71.63% | 63.11% | 80.15% |
| Random forest |
| 66.73% | 87.20% |
DWT features classification results of EEG.
| DWT feature classification result EEG | Accuracy (average) | Specificity (average) | Sensitivity (average) |
|---|---|---|---|
| C4.5 | 80.93% | 81.11% | 80.96% |
| Classification via regression | 82.5% | 76.74% | 88.26% |
| Random forest |
| 79.74% | 91.66% |
Figure 9ECG versus EEG classification comparison.