| Literature DB >> 24490979 |
Hong-Bo Xie1, Tianruo Guo, Siwei Bai, Socrates Dokos.
Abstract
Electromyographic (EMG) is a bio-signal collected on human skeletal muscle. Analysis of EMG signals has been widely used to detect human movement intent, control various human-machine interfaces, diagnose neuromuscular diseases, and model neuromusculoskeletal system. With the advances of artificial intelligence and soft computing, many sophisticated techniques have been proposed for such purpose. Hybrid soft computing system (HSCS), the integration of these different techniques, aims to further improve the effectiveness, efficiency, and accuracy of EMG analysis. This paper reviews and compares key combinations of neural network, support vector machine, fuzzy logic, evolutionary computing, and swarm intelligence for EMG analysis. Our suggestions on the possible future development of HSCS in EMG analysis are also given in terms of basic soft computing techniques, further combination of these techniques, and their other applications in EMG analysis.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24490979 PMCID: PMC3922626 DOI: 10.1186/1475-925X-13-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Eng Online ISSN: 1475-925X Impact factor: 2.819
A summary of hybrid neural-fuzzy techniques applied to EMG analysis
| [ | Classification: 10 hand motions | Fuzzy-C means + MLP | Accuracy: 99% |
| [ | Classification: hand motions | Fuzzy entropy + MLP | Accuracy: 99% |
| [ | Classification: 2 leg motions | Surgeno model + RBF | Accuracy: 57/60 |
| [ | Classification: 7 arm motions | Surgeno model + MLP | Accuracy: 86% |
| [ | Classification: 6 hand motions | Fuzzy clustering NN | Accuracy: 95% ~ 100% |
| [ | Classification: 6 classes hand motions | ANFIS | Accuracy: 96.7±1.2% [ |
| [ | Prediction gait events | ANFIS | Accuracy: 95.3%. ~ 98.6%. |
| [ | Classification: 3 arm motions | Abe-Lan fuzzy network | Abe-Lan fuzzy network performed better than SOM, FCM, and MLP |
| [ | Classification: 6 motions | Fuzzy Min-Max ANN | Accuracy: 10% higher than without fatigue compensation |
| [ | Classification: 4 hand motions | Fuzzy SVM | Accuracy: Fuzzy SVM outperformed BP NN 5% |
| [ | Classification: 6 hand motions | FuzzyEn + ELM, CrEn + ELM | CrEn outperformed FuzzyEn |
| [ | Classification: 10 grasps or in-hand manipulations | FGMM | Accuracy: 96.7% of FGMM, better than HMM, SVM |
| [ | Modelling: EMG-movements | ANFIS | Accuracy: 97%, 99%, 87.9%, and 81.8% for four subjects, respectively |
| [ | Modelling: force moment and velocity-peak EMG | Neuro-fuzzy | Error: 4.97% ~ 13.16% |
| [ | Modelling: kinematics-EMG-force | RFNN | Small prediction error |
| [ | Modelling: EMG-force moment | Takagi-Sugeno | EMG-to-activation model performed better than Takagi-Sugeno |
| [ | Control upper-limb exoskeleton | Neuro-fuzzy | Effectiveness of the control method |
| [ | Control upper-limb exoskeleton | Neuro-fuzzy | Low RMS errors |
| [ | Control ankle exoskeleton | Neuro-fuzzy | Low RMS errors |
| [ | Diagnosis | Fuzzy integral + BP NN | Accuracy: 80.95±7.2% |
| [ | Diagnosis | FSVM | Accuracy: 93.5±1.4% FSVM performed better than LDA, BP and RBF |
| [ | Decomposition | AFNNC | Accuracy: AFNNC performed better than ACC at roughly 6.1% |
| [ | Diagnosis | NEFCLASS | Accuracy: 90% |
| [ | Diagnosis | ANFIS | Accuracy: 76.43% |
A summary of hybrid neural-evolutionary techniques applied to EMG analysis
| [ | Classification: 6 arm motions | GA + MLP + HMMs | Accuracy: 87.7% |
| [ | Classification: 7 wrist motions | GA + BP ANN | Accuracy: 5% ~ 10% [ |
| [ | Classification: 7 wrist motions | GA + MLP | Feature reduction rate: 70% Accuracy: 6% improvement |
| [ | Classification: 6 hand motions | GA + MLP | Error: 4.89% |
| [ | Classification: 4 hand motions | GA + BP ANN | Accuracy: 91.38% |
| [ | Classification: 4 hand motions | GA + RBF + MLP | Accuracy: 6% improvement compared to MLP |
| [ | Classification: 4 hand motions | GA + FFT + PCA + MLP | Improved accuracy and speed |
| [ | Modelling: EMG-on/off signals during stride | GA + BP ANN | Improved speed |
| [ | Classification: 12 finger motions | GA + SVM | Reducing 8 ~ 11 channels and comparable accuracy |
| [ | Classification: 10 hand motions | GA + BP ANN | Accuracy: 98% |
| [ | Classification: 6 wrist motions | GA + RBF | Accuracy: 75% |
| [ | Classification: 2 muscle states | GA + SVM | Accuracy: 97.3% |
| [ | Modelling: EMG-force | GA + BP ANN | Accuracy: 99% |
| [ | Diagnosis | GBLS | Accuracy: 95% for training, 70% for test |
A summary of hybrid neural-swarm intelligence techniques applied to EMG analysis
| [ | Classification: 8 hand motions | ACO + BP | Better than PCA + BP |
| [ | Classification: 10 hand motions | PSO + BP | Accuracy: 99% |
| [ | Classification: 6 hand motions | PSO + EMD + PNN | Accuracy: 93.3% |
| [ | Classification: 10 hand motions | PSO + MLP | Accuracy: 95% |
| [ | Diagnosis | PSO + RBF | Accuracy: 88.92% |
| [ | Diagnosis | PSO + SVM | Accuracy: 97.41% |
A summary of other hybrid soft computing techniques applied to EMG analysis
| [ | Classification: 7 limb motions | ACO + DE | Accuracy: 94.73% (validation), 93.39% (test), better than ULDA and PCA |
| [ | Classification: 7 limb motions | FL + LDA + DE | Accuracy: 93.75% (time domain feature), 94.71% (wavelet feature) |
| [ | Classification: 7 limb motions | FL + LDA + PSO | Accuracy: Similar to ANTDE in [ |
| [ | Modelling: EMG-force | GA + FL | RMS error: 12.4% |