| Literature DB >> 31238537 |
Xiaoguang Liu1,2, Huanliang Li3,4, Cunguang Lou5,6, Tie Liang7,8, Xiuling Liu9,10, Hongrui Wang11,12.
Abstract
Falls are the major cause of fatal and non-fatal injury among people aged more than 65 years. Due to the grave consequences of the occurrence of falls, it is necessary to conduct thorough research on falls. This paper presents a method for the study of fall detection using surface electromyography (sEMG) based on an improved dual parallel channels convolutional neural network (IDPC-CNN). The proposed IDPC-CNN model is designed to identify falls from daily activities using the spectral features of sEMG. Firstly, the classification accuracy of time domain features and spectrograms are compared using linear discriminant analysis (LDA), k-nearest neighbor (KNN) and support vector machine (SVM). Results show that spectrograms provide a richer way to extract pattern information and better classification performance. Therefore, the spectrogram features of sEMG are selected as the input of IDPC-CNN to distinguish between daily activities and falls. Finally, The IDPC-CNN is compared with SVM and three different structure CNNs under the same conditions. Experimental results show that the proposed IDPC-CNN achieves 92.55% accuracy, 95.71% sensitivity and 91.7% specificity. Overall, The IDPC-CNN is more effective than the comparison in accuracy, efficiency, training and generalization.Entities:
Keywords: convolutional neural network; fall detection; pattern recognition; spectrograms; surface electromyography
Year: 2019 PMID: 31238537 PMCID: PMC6630266 DOI: 10.3390/s19122814
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1The position of surface electromyography (sEMG) electrode.
Basic information of different research subjects.
| Subject | Gender | Age | Height/cm | Weight/kg | Lower Limbs Diseases |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Male | 24 | 176 | 74 | No |
| 2 | Male | 23 | 175 | 78 | No |
| 3 | Male | 23 | 172 | 72 | No |
| 4 | Male | 25 | 179 | 83 | No |
| 5 | Male | 24 | 170 | 70 | No |
| 6 | Female | 27 | 168 | 51 | No |
| 7 | Female | 23 | 165 | 47 | No |
| 8 | Female | 24 | 162 | 45 | No |
| 9 | Female | 24 | 170 | 55 | No |
| 10 | Female | 23 | 160 | 44 | No |
Figure 2The 4 gestures considered in this work.
Figure 3The comparison of sEMG signals before and after denoising.
Figure 4Mean short-term energy value result.
Figure 5Threshold segmentation diagram.
Figure 6Effective signal segment extraction.
Figure 7Variance contribution rate.
Variance and cumulative variance contribution rate.
| Principal Component | Variance Contribution Rate | Accumulated Variance Contribution Rate |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 47.6 | 47.6 |
| 2 | 25.5 | 73.1 |
| 3 | 10.2 | 83.3 |
| 4 | 5.3 | 88.6 |
| 5 | 3.1 | 91.7 |
| 6 | 1.8 | 93.5 |
| 7 | 1.1 | 94.6 |
| 8 | 0.7 | 95.3 |
| 9 | 0.2 | 95.5 |
| 10 | 0.1 | 95.6 |
| 20 | 0.06 | 96.38 |
Figure 8Spectrogram processing example.
Figure 9Feature extraction flow chart.
Figure 10Sliding window schematic.
Figure 11Accuracy comparison diagram.
Figure 12Improved dual parallel channels convolutional neural network structure.
Performance indicators comparison.
| Performance Indicators | RMS | SPM |
|---|---|---|
| Signal preprocessing time(ms) | 25.09 | 25.09 |
| Feature extraction time(ms) | 101.37 | 357.16 |
| Classifier training time(h) | 7.5 | 10.6 |
| Classifier test result time(ms) | 57.12 | 63.5 |
| Accuracy(%) | 84.21 | 92.55 |
Figure 13Dual parallel channel 1 convolutional neural network structure.
Figure 14Dual parallel channel 2 convolutional neural network structure.
Figure 15Single-channel convolutional neural network (CNN) structure.
Figure 16Train and test flow chart.
Figure 17Performance index comparison.