| Literature DB >> 23606900 |
Tao Wang1, Jiang-hua Huang, Lin Lin, Chang'an A Zhan.
Abstract
To obtain reliable transient auditory evoked potentials (AEPs) from EEGs recorded using high stimulus rate (HSR) paradigm, it is critical to design the stimulus sequences of appropriate frequency properties. Traditionally, the individual stimulus events in a stimulus sequence occur only at discrete time points dependent on the sampling frequency of the recording system and the duration of stimulus sequence. This dependency likely causes the implementation of suboptimal stimulus sequences, sacrificing the reliability of resulting AEPs. In this paper, we explicate the use of continuous-time stimulus sequence for HSR paradigm, which is independent of the discrete electroencephalogram (EEG) recording system. We employ simulation studies to examine the applicability of the continuous-time stimulus sequences and the impacts of sampling frequency on AEPs in traditional studies using discrete-time design. Results from these studies show that the continuous-time sequences can offer better frequency properties and improve the reliability of recovered AEPs. Furthermore, we find that the errors in the recovered AEPs depend critically on the sampling frequencies of experimental systems, and their relationship can be fitted using a reciprocal function. As such, our study contributes to the literature by demonstrating the applicability and advantages of continuous-time stimulus sequences for HSR paradigm and by revealing the relationship between the reliability of AEPs and sampling frequencies of the experimental systems when discrete-time stimulus sequences are used in traditional manner for the HSR paradigm.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23606900 PMCID: PMC3626223 DOI: 10.1155/2013/396034
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Comput Math Methods Med ISSN: 1748-670X Impact factor: 2.238
Figure 1(a) A schematic diagram of a stimulus loop that contains 17 individual stimulus impulses to indicate the repetitive presentations in an experiment. (b) A sweep of stimulus sequence with impulses occurring at t (p = 1,2, 3,…, 17) to represent a period of stimulus loop in time domain (T = 1545.5 ms; f 0 = 0.647 Hz). (c) A portion of the Fourier spectrum of the inverse filter |S (jkf 0)|−1. Note that within the frequency band of interest ([f ′, f ′] = [5, 120] Hz), |S (jkf 0)|−1 is all below the threshold (θ = 1).
Four optimized stimulus impulse sequences obtained using differential evolution algorithm.
| Sequence | Stimulus interval (Δ |
|---|---|
| Seq 1 | 27.21, 22.34, 27.16, 21.40, 21.43, 23.26, 27.18, 24.38, 26.19, 21.48, 27.16, 24.32, 27.05, 23.57, 24.02, 26.30, 27.04, 21.40, 23.41, 27.21, 22.16, 24.62, 21.47, 22.37, 22.54, 27.19, 27.21, 21.40, 21.40, 21.49, 27.21, 22.57, 25.52, 25.15, 27.21, 21.40, 21.40, 27.21, 24.92, 21.40, 25.93, 27.21, 27.21, 21.43, 21.74, 22.23, 27.20, 26.74, 27.21, 21.40, 24.39, 21.49, 24.38, 27.21, 22.54, 27.20, 21.40, 21.86, 27.21, 21.97, 22.59, 25.09, 27.15, 21.48, 26.27 |
|
| |
| Seq 2 | 23.49, 21.91, 27.96, 27.96, 21.79, 21.79, 24.88, 27.96, 24.36, 21.79, 26.27, 23.13, 26.82, 27.96, 21.79, 27.96, 23.67, 22.83, 27.96, 21.79, 22.40, 27.96, 27.96, 21.91, 21.79, 27.96, 23.33, 27.96, 21.79, 27.96, 21.91, 27.94, 26.77, 21.79, 24.64, 27.25, 21.79, 24.89, 27.96, 25.00 |
|
| |
| Seq 3 | 28.38, 21.90, 28.38, 23.20, 21.90, 28.38, 28.24, 21.90, 25.00, 28.38, 21.90, 28.38, 28.38, 22.24, 25.10, 28.38, 28.38, 24.72, 21.90, 28.37, 25.12, 27.13, 23.68, 21.90, 21.90, 28.38, 21.90, 24.35, 22.14, 28.24, 28.38, 23.78, 22.29, 28.38, 22.07, 25.35, 21.90, 28.38, 25.00, 21.90 |
|
| |
| Seq 4 | 26.40, 27.75, 21.66, 27.90, 21.94, 27.91, 21.66, 22.67, 23.90, 27.64, 27.91, 21.88, 21.66, 21.66, 27.91, 27.91, 21.66, 27.03, 27.42, 26.29, 21.66, 25.65, 27.90, 21.66, 27.89, 25.77, 21.66, 21.66, 26.10, 27.91, 21.66, 24.73, 27.91, 21.66, 27.90, 24.01, 21.66, 27.90, 21.66, 23.63 |
Figure 4Comparison with respect to the |S (jkf 0)|−1 measure between the continuous-time stimulus sequence and its discrete-time counterpart at discretization frequency of f = 1 kHz. (a) The plot of the |S (jkf 0)|−1 measure for the continuous-time stimulus sequence (data points in “x”) and that for the corresponding discrete-time stimulus sequence (data points in “o,” discretization frequency f = 1 kHz). (b) The difference between the |S (jkf 0)|−1 measures, respectively, for continuous-time and discrete-time stimulus sequences.
Figure 5Comparison with respect to the |S (jkf 0)|−1 measure between the continuous-time stimulus sequence and its discrete-time counterpart at discretization frequency of f = 20 kHz. (a) The plot of the |S (jkf 0)|−1 measure for the continuous-time stimulus sequence (data points in “x”) and that for the corresponding discrete-time stimulus sequence (data points in “o”, discretization frequency f = 20 kHz). (b) The difference between the |S (jkf 0)|−1 measures, respectively, for continuous-time and discrete-time stimulus sequences.
Figure 2The graphic representation of the relationship between γ and f . The data points for four datasets are fit using a reciprocal function: γ = 11.78/f − 0.01363, (R 2 = 0.9982). The location of maximal curvature is at f = 3.43 kHz.
Figure 3The graphic representation of the relationship between γ and f . The data points for four datasets are fit using a reciprocal function: γ = 14.25/f − 0.003574, (R 2 = 0.9983). The location of maximal curvature is at f = 3.77 kHz.
The errors between estimated and true solution at various AD rates for four sequences.
| Seq. ID | SNR | AD rate (kHz) | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Inf | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 7 | 9 | 11 | 15 | 20 | 25 | ||
| Seq 1 | 9.5 | 2.02 | 20.53 | 12.65 | 10.31 | 8.85 | 7.87 | 6.67 | 5.94 | 5.29 | 4.58 | 3.96 | 3.54 |
| 0 | 8.24 | 68.01 | 43.29 | 35.02 | 29.79 | 26.66 | 22.55 | 20.02 | 17.89 | 15.50 | 13.41 | 12.00 | |
| −6.0 | 18.51 | 141.81 | 91.21 | 73.72 | 62.67 | 56.15 | 47.48 | 42.10 | 37.68 | 32.63 | 28.22 | 25.27 | |
|
| |||||||||||||
| Seq 2 | 9.5 | 4.19 | 31.52 | 21.39 | 17.91 | 15.40 | 14.05 | 11.72 | 10.26 | 9.40 | 8.02 | 6.98 | 6.43 |
| 0 | 9.52 | 78.32 | 52.98 | 44.67 | 38.33 | 35.15 | 29.23 | 25.55 | 23.44 | 19.99 | 17.44 | 6.23 | |
| −6.0 | 18.14 | 149.64 | 101.20 | 85.47 | 73.32 | 67.31 | 55.94 | 48.87 | 44.83 | 38.25 | 33.39 | 31.15 | |
|
| |||||||||||||
| Seq 3 | 9.5 | 5.02 | 27.32 | 18.70 | 15.48 | 13.67 | 11.78 | 10.07 | 8.83 | 8.00 | 6.85 | 5.96 | 5.32 |
| 0 | 10.60 | 63.02 | 42.47 | 35.49 | 31.81 | 26.83 | 23.06 | 20.21 | 18.27 | 15.66 | 13.63 | 12.17 | |
| −6.0 | 19.13 | 117.29 | 78.61 | 65.94 | 59.41 | 49.73 | 42.81 | 37.53 | 33.89 | 29.07 | 25.29 | 22.57 | |
|
| |||||||||||||
| Seq 4 | 9.5 | 3.48 | 21.60 | 15.11 | 12.64 | 10.88 | 9.63 | 8.31 | 7.35 | 6.52 | 5.63 | 4.85 | 4.37 |
| 0 | 10.79 | 67.96 | 47.93 | 39.82 | 34.17 | 30.32 | 26.14 | 23.13 | 20.61 | 17.75 | 15.30 | 13.76 | |
| −6.0 | 22.53 | 139.85 | 98.80 | 81.91 | 70.28 | 62.39 | 53.76 | 47.56 | 42.44 | 36.51 | 31.48 | 28.31 | |
Figure 6The errors between estimated and true solution at various AD rates (1–25 kHz) as well as the case of continuous-time sequence (tick “c” in the horizontal coordinate). Four sequences are examined under three SNR conditions (see the legend). γ in the vertical coordinate implies both errors of γ and γ .
Figure 7Comparison of transient AEPs solved by CLAD method at different SNR conditions and at two representative discretization frequencies. (a) AEPs (the original in dashed blue, the one recovered based on continuous-time stimulus sequence in thin red, and the one recovered based on discrete-time stimulus sequence in black). The discretization frequency (AD rate) f = 1 kHz; and the SNRs for three panels from top to bottom are, respectively, 9.5, 0 and −6.0 dB. (b) Same as (a) except the discretization frequency f = 20 kHz.