| Literature DB >> 28692691 |
Yi Zhang1,2,3, Peiyang Li2,3, Xuyang Zhu2,3, Steven W Su4, Qing Guo1, Peng Xu2,3, Dezhong Yao2,3.
Abstract
The EMG signal indicates the electrophysiological response to daily living of activities, particularly to lower-limb knee exercises. Literature reports have shown numerous benefits of the Wavelet analysis in EMG feature extraction for pattern recognition. However, its application to typical knee exercises when using only a single EMG channel is limited. In this study, three types of knee exercises, i.e., flexion of the leg up (standing), hip extension from a sitting position (sitting) and gait (walking) are investigated from 14 healthy untrained subjects, while EMG signals from the muscle group of vastus medialis and the goniometer on the knee joint of the detected leg are synchronously monitored and recorded. Four types of lower-limb motions including standing, sitting, stance phase of walking, and swing phase of walking, are segmented. The Wavelet Transform (WT) based Singular Value Decomposition (SVD) approach is proposed for the classification of four lower-limb motions using a single-channel EMG signal from the muscle group of vastus medialis. Based on lower-limb motions from all subjects, the combination of five-level wavelet decomposition and SVD is used to comprise the feature vector. The Support Vector Machine (SVM) is then configured to build a multiple-subject classifier for which the subject independent accuracy will be given across all subjects for the classification of four types of lower-limb motions. In order to effectively indicate the classification performance, EMG features from time-domain (e.g., Mean Absolute Value (MAV), Root-Mean-Square (RMS), integrated EMG (iEMG), Zero Crossing (ZC)) and frequency-domain (e.g., Mean Frequency (MNF) and Median Frequency (MDF)) are also used to classify lower-limb motions. The five-fold cross validation is performed and it repeats fifty times in order to acquire the robust subject independent accuracy. Results show that the proposed WT-based SVD approach has the classification accuracy of 91.85%±0.88% which outperforms other feature models.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28692691 PMCID: PMC5503271 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0180526
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1The evaluation procedure for classification of four types of lower-limb motions.
Fig 2The experiment protocol for EMG data collection in terms of standing-sitting and walking sessions.
Fig 3The EMG time series for the segmented lower-limb motions in terms of the swing phase, the stance phase, sitting, and standing.
The mean and STD for temporal features based on experimental trails from all participants on the vastus medialis muscle.
| MAV | RMS | iEMG | ZC | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Swing | 0.02±50 | 0.03±33.3 | 25.42±45.25 | 137.03±35.88 |
| Stance | 0.01±100 | 0.02±50 | 27.28±78.85 | 260.82±22.11 |
| Standing | 0.01±200 | 0.01±400 | 5.44±143.38 | 97.84±73.95 |
| Sitting | 0.01±300 | 0.02±300 | 11.65±188.24 | 132.82±56.99 |
STD% represents the percentage of the standard deviation over the corresponding mean.
Fig 4The PSD curves of the segmented EMG time series in terms of the swing phase, the stance phase, sitting, and standing.
The mean and STD for frequency-domain features based on experimental trails from all participants on the vastus medialis muscle.
| MDF | MNF | |
|---|---|---|
| Swing phase | 45.43±11.64 | 53.07±9.37 |
| Stance phase | 48.48±13.51 | 54.17±7.72 |
| Standing | 36.52±22.78 | 43.82±19.17 |
| Sitting | 38.38±22.64 | 45.25±19.51 |
STD% represents the percentage of the standard deviation over thecorresponding mean. The unit for mean values of MDF and MNF is Hz.
The mean and STD results of time-frequency features by WT-based SVD approach based on experimental trails from all participants on the vastus medialis muscle.
| Stance | Swing | Standing | Sitting | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| cD1 | 0.22±68.18 | 0.25±48 | 0.26±430.77 | 0.26±315.38 |
| cD2 | 0.44±40.91 | 0.35±71.43 | 0.23±213.64 | 0.48±274.47 |
| cD3 | 0.85±40 | 0.65±78.46 | 0.24±216.67 | 0.4±231.71 |
| cD4 | 0.54±62.96 | 0.42±66.67 | 0.1±150 | 0.16±168.75 |
| cD5 | 0.21±55 | 0.16±68.75 | 0.04±125 | 0.06±150 |
| cA5 | 0.11±70 | 0.08±75 | 0.02±100 | 0.03±100 |
STD% represents the percentage of the standard deviation over the corresponding mean.
The subject independent accuracies for standing, sitting, stance phase of walking, and swing phase of walking.
| Feature vectors | Accuracy(%) | STD(%) |
|---|---|---|
| MAV+RMS+iEMG+ZC | 66.96 | 3.12 |
| MNF+MDF | 77.1 | 0.01 |
| MAV+RMS+iEMG+ZC+MDF+MNF | 55.11 | 0.02 |
| cD1+cD2+cD3+cD4+cD5+cA5 | ||
| MAV+RMS+iEMG+ZC+MDF+MNF+cD1+cD2+cD3+cD4+cD5+cA5 | 53.36 | 0.02 |
STD represents the percentage of the standard deviation over the corresponding accuracy.
Fig 5The WT-based SVD features for all trials with four lower-limb motions.