| Literature DB >> 24187665 |
L Mesin1, A Monaco, R Cattaneo.
Abstract
Pupil is controlled by the autonomous nervous system (ANS). It shows complex movements and changes of size even in conditions of constant stimulation. The possibility of extracting information on ANS by processing data recorded during a short experiment using a low cost system for pupil investigation is studied. Moreover, the significance of nonlinear information contained in the pupillogram is investigated. We examined 13 healthy subjects in different stationary conditions, considering habitual dental occlusion (HDO) as a weak stimulation of the ANS with respect to the maintenance of the rest position (RP) of the jaw. Images of pupil captured by infrared cameras were processed to estimate position and size on each frame. From such time series, we extracted linear indexes (e.g., average size, average displacement, and spectral parameters) and nonlinear information using recurrence quantification analysis (RQA). Data were classified using multilayer perceptrons and support vector machines trained using different sets of input indexes: the best performance in classification was obtained including nonlinear indexes in the input features. These results indicate that RQA nonlinear indexes provide additional information on pupil dynamics with respect to linear descriptors, allowing the discrimination of even a slight stimulation of the ANS. Their use in the investigation of pathology is suggested.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 24187665 PMCID: PMC3804145 DOI: 10.1155/2013/420509
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
Figure 1Example of detection and preliminary processing of data. (a) Detection system. (b) Example of processing of a single frame of the video captured by one of the two cameras of the system. The boundary of the pupil is identified and interpolated with a circle. (c) Area of the pupil as a function of time.
Figure 2Example of processing of a pupil size time series recorded from a subject in stationary conditions. Normalized data are shown in (a). The extraction of some linear and nonlinear indexes is shown in (b) and (c), respectively (each point in (c) indicates a recurrence).
Figure 3Example of nonlinear processing of pupil movements during (a-c) light and (b-d) darkness condition, recorded from the same subject in RP.
Mean ± standard deviation of indexes.
| Index | RP | RP | HDO | HDO |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Darkness | Light | Darkness | Light | |
| Size (pixel) | 7020 ± 1484 | 3751 ± 1808 | 7139 ± 2373 | 4047 ± 1608 |
| MNF (Hz) | 0.337 ± 0.246 | 0.239 ± 0.059 | 0.314 ± 0.197 | 0.231 ± 0.091 |
|
| 27.2 ± 12.1 | 19.6 ± 8.2 | 24.4 ± 11.9 | 20.8 ± 15.7 |
|
| 16.9 ± 7.9 | 19.2 ± 10.5 | 17.8 ± 8.6 | 18.5 ± 8.4 |
| MNF | 0.165 ± 0.061 | 0.298 ± 0.142 | 0.204 ± 0.123 | 0.264 ± 0.172 |
| MNF | 0.225 ± 0.101 | 0.452 ± 0.270 | 0.249 ± 0.167 | 0.490 ± 0.256 |
| STD | 8.518 ± 3.914 | 3.675 ± 4.695 | 6.657 ± 3.592 | 3.255 ± 1.740 |
| STD | 5.134 ± 3.602 | 3.732 ± 4.069 | 4.850 ± 2.729 | 2.843 ± 2.525 |
| RR (%) | 25.2 ± 19.9 | 8.9 ± 6.8 | 12.4 ± 10.2 | 7.9 ± 3.6 |
| DET (%) | 87.5 ± 19.7 | 87.6 ± 7.5 | 77.9 ± 19.9 | 89.6 ± 5.6 |
| RR | 2.7 ± 6.0 | 4.3 ± 11.8 | 2.8 ± 6.0 | 1.2 ± 0.9 |
| DET | 16.7 ± 24.0 | 22.5 ± 22.6 | 15.8 ± 24.0 | 14.7 ± 7.8 |
Two-sided Wilcoxon signed rank test (P values).
| Index | RP light versus darkness | RP versus HDO (light) | RP versus HDO (dark) | HDO darkness versus light |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Size (pixel) |
| 0.36 |
|
|
| MNF (Hz) |
| 0.24 | 0.41 |
|
|
|
| 0.15 |
|
|
|
| 0.21 | 0.55 | 0.23 |
|
| MNF |
| 0.75 | 0.06 | 0.93 |
| MNF |
| 0.061 | 0.84 |
|
| STD |
| 0.17 | 0.11 |
|
| STD | 0.071 | 0.12 |
|
|
| RR (%) |
| 0.15 |
|
|
| DET (%) | 0.85 | 0.22 |
|
|
| RR | 0.79 | 0.11 | 0.25 | 0.73 |
| DET | 0.17 |
| 0.54 | 0.09 |
bold italic numbers correspond to significant differences.
Classification of RP and HDO in light conditions.
| RP versus HDO in light conditions | MLP | SVM | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Input indexes | Error | Input indexes | Error | |
| 3 inputs | MNF | 46.2% | RR MNF MNF | 26.9% |
| 4 inputs | Size MNF | 46.2% | RR MNF | 34.6% |
| 5 inputs | RR DET MNF | 50% | DET MNF | 34.6% |
Set of input features (with 3, 4, or 5 inputs) providing best classification of RP and HDO in light.
Classification of RP and HDO in darkness conditions.
| RP versus HDO in light conditions | MLP | SVM | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Input indexes | Error | Input indexes | Error | |
| 3 inputs | Size DET STD | 19.2% | RR MNF MNF | 26.9% |
| 4 inputs | Size RR DET STD | 19.2% | Size DET MNF STDy | 26.9% |
| 5 inputs | Size RR DET | 15.4% | Size DET MNF MNF | 26.9% |
Set of input features (with 3, 4, or 5 inputs) providing best classification of RP and HDO in darkness.