| Literature DB >> 25972896 |
Purnendu Tiwari1, Subhojit Ghosh2, Rakesh Kumar Sinha3.
Abstract
Transferring the brain computer interface (BCI) from laboratory condition to meet the real world application needs BCI to be applied asynchronously without any time constraint. High level of dynamism in the electroencephalogram (EEG) signal reasons us to look toward evolutionary algorithm (EA). Motivated by these two facts, in this work a hybrid GA-PSO based K-means clustering technique has been used to distinguish two class motor imagery (MI) tasks. The proposed hybrid GA-PSO based K-means clustering is found to outperform genetic algorithm (GA) and particle swarm optimization (PSO) based K-means clustering techniques in terms of both accuracy and execution time. The lesser execution time of hybrid GA-PSO technique makes it suitable for real time BCI application. Time frequency representation (TFR) techniques have been used to extract the feature of the signal under investigation. TFRs based features are extracted and relying on the concept of event related synchronization (ERD) and desynchronization (ERD) feature vector is formed.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25972896 PMCID: PMC4417985 DOI: 10.1155/2015/945729
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Comput Intell Neurosci
Figure 1Recording setup for the BCI experiment.
Features used for classification with their type.
| Type | Feature |
|---|---|
| Linear time frequency processing | Short time Fourier transform |
|
| |
| Bilinear time frequency processing (Cohen's class) | Born Jordan |
| Choi-Williams distribution | |
| Pseudo-Wigner-Ville distribution | |
| Smoothed pseudo-Wigner-Ville distribution | |
| Wigner-Ville distribution | |
| Zhaos-Atlas-Marks distribution | |
|
| |
| Bilinear time frequency processing (Affine class) | Unitary Bertrand distribution |
| D-Flandrin distribution | |
| Scalogram for Morlet wavelet | |
| Smoothed pseudo-Affine-Wigner distribution | |
Figure 2(a) Born Jordan feature for ß band in C3 channel for arbitrary trial corresponding to right task. (b) Born Jordan feature for ß band in C4 channel for arbitrary trial corresponding to right task. (c) Born Jordan feature for µ band in C4 channel for arbitrary trial corresponding to left task. (d) Born Jordan feature for µ band in C4 channel for arbitrary trial corresponding to right task.
Classification performance against different K-means based clustering.
| Subject |
| GA based | PSO based | GA-PSO based |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Subject 1 | ||||
| Average (%) | 57.19 | 58.32 | 59.48 | 60.42 |
| Standard deviation | 3.271 | 0.229 | 1.484 | 0.137 |
| Subject 2 | ||||
| Average (%) | 58.75 | 66.08 | 66.81 | 67.46 |
| Standard deviation | 2.734 | 0.435 | 0.218 | 0.105 |
| Subject 3 | ||||
| Average (%) | 62.50 | 63.89 | 64.60 | 65.25 |
| Standard deviation | 4.872 | 0.295 | 0.177 | 0.746 |
| Subject 4 | ||||
| Average (%) | 50.62 | 58.18 | 61.18 | 61.38 |
| Standard deviation | 3.979 | 0.518 | 2.771 | 0.660 |
| Subject 5 | ||||
| Average (%) | 56.87 | 58.18 | 60.33 | 59.60 |
| Standard deviation | 2.794 | 1.107 | 2.989 | 1.714 |
| Subject 6 | ||||
| Average (%) | 57.19 | 58.50 | 60.28 | 57.37 |
| Std. deviation | 5.552 | 0.868 | 5.148 | 1.782 |
| Subject 7 | ||||
| Average (%) | 53.44 | 58.29 | 59.96 | 60.82 |
| Standard deviation | 4.492 | 1.271 | 1.427 | 1.410 |
| Subject 8 | ||||
| Average (%) | 54.06 | 58.32 | 58.62 | 59.00 |
| Standard deviation | 2.686 | 0.220 | 0.705 | 0.826 |
| Subject 9 | ||||
| Average (%) | 50.62 | 55.01 | 55.88 | 57.40 |
| Standard deviation | 2.794 | 2.561 | 2.371 | 1.736 |
Figure 3(a) Variation in misclassification (%) with iterations for GA-PSO based K-means clustering for different subjects. (b) Variation in misclassification (%) with iterations for GA based K-means clustering for different subjects. (c) Variation in misclassification (%) with iterations for PSO based K-means clustering for different subjects.
Average ranking of clustering algorithms based on Friedman's test with a critical value: X(0.05,3) = 7.814733.
| Algorithms |
| GA based | PSO based | Hybrid GA-PSO based |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ranking | 4 | 2.89 | 1.78 | 1.33 |
Friedman and Iman-Davenport statistical tests.
| Method | Statistical value |
| Hypothesis |
|---|---|---|---|
| Friedman | 23.13333 | 3.79 × 10−5 | Rejected |
| Iman-Davenport | 47.8621 | <0.00001 | Rejected |