| Literature DB >> 33294707 |
Shugo Suwazono1, Hiroshi Arao2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Considering the need for daily activity analysis of older adults, development of easy-to-use, free electroencephalogram (EEG) analysis tools are desired in order to decrease barriers to accessing this technology and increase the entry of a wide range of new researchers. NEWEntities:
Keywords: Averaging; Behavioral neuroscience; Cognition; Cognitive neuroscience; Electroencephalogram; Event-related potential; Free software; Neurology; Perl; Physiology; Scalp topography; Signal processing; Software engineering
Year: 2020 PMID: 33294707 PMCID: PMC7701343 DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e05580
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Heliyon ISSN: 2405-8440
Figure 1Procedures and data flow utilizing our processing system. Detailed explanations are described in the Methods section.
Figure 2The format of the input EEG file. The first 10 lines of an input EEG file, consisting of 26 channels (including 4 trigger channels), which was exported from the Nihon Kohden EEG machine as a text file. The initial 2 lines describe general information, including the sampling interval, gain (vertical resolution), and channel names. This information is stored in the header hash used by the current analysis system. The DC03 (22nd)‒DC05 (24th) channels include trigger information (4-bit) from another personal computer used for stimulus (visual or auditory) presentation; these data will be analyzed later to judge the onset time of stimulus presentation. Any text data with this format can imported/analyzed with the current system. “BN” stands for the balanced non-cephalic reference electrodes (Stephenson and Gibbs, 1951), which are routinely used at our facility.
AVERAGER.pl. The Perl script file, describing all steps necessary to make an average file.
| use erp; |
Figure 3Artifact rejection using the option of visual inspection of each trial. For artifact rejection procedures, the current analysis system allows users to review/inspect each trial to accept/reject inclusion of that trial in the final average file. 2 windows are used: Window A (left panel) receives the user's decision as “accept” (by pressing the “A” key of the keyboard), or as “reject” (by pressing the “R” key of the keyboard), while Window B (right panel) displays a single trial. Once the user's choice has been entered in Window A (by pressing the “A” or “R” key), the waveforms displayed in Window B immediately changes to those of the next trial. These procedures are repeated for all subsequent trials with the same stimulus triggers.
Figure 4Average multi-channel waveforms obtained. Neurosurgeons' view of the averaged responses (including 3 eye channels), calculated from 47 trials after artifact rejection, following target stimuli in a novel auditory paradigm (70% standard stimuli, 10% novel stimuli, button press task to 20% targets), recorded from a young normal subject. Waveforms on the left panel represent those before filtering, and the low-pass filtered (FIR, 30 Hz) responses (green: standard stimuli, cyan: novel stimuli, red: target stimuli) are superimposed in the right panel. All responses are baselined based on the average of the 100-ms pre-stimulus period.
Figure 5Iso-potential topographical maps. The panels on the left side show selected target responses at midline electrodes from the data in Figure 4. In the right panels, linearly interpolated iso-potential topographical maps, generated by the current analysis system, are shown at 2 latencies; 116 ms (at which N1 peaks at Fz), and 341 ms (at which P3b peaks at Pz). Color scaling of the maps can be changed according to the maximum/minimum value of each component's voltage.
Figure 6Validation: Comparison of average waveforms of dummy data. Dummy raw EEG data were generated and averaged by commercial software as well as by the current analysis system. The difference waves between the 2 were completely flat.
Figure 7Flexible band pass filtering is implemented in the current system. Two filters were applied to the original average (A): 1–8 Hz (B) and 20–60 Hz (c), utilizing the fast Fourier transform library (Math::FFT) for Perl. The original averaged data were obtained as target responses from a young normal subject while executing the visual novel P3 paradigm.
Figure 8Partial averages. In panel A, the average of all 36 artifact-free target trials (green), the averages from odd trials (red), and the average from even trials (blue) are superimposed at 3 channels, recorded from one subject using a visual novelty P3 paradigm. In panel B, partial averages obtained averaging responses to the 1st 10 (green), the 2nd 10 (red), the 3rd 10 (blue), and the last 6 (yellow) stimuli were respectively calculated. The largest amplitude of P3b (mean of 460 ± 5 ms decided by the total average on A) is noticed in the average of the 3rd 10 trials (D). For better visibility, 4 partial averages were low pass filtered (30 Hz) using the fast Fourier transform library (Math::FFT) for Perl (C).
Figure 9An example of flexible analysis using the current system. Procedures to make new averages with a shorter analysis period from the original long analysis period by re-splicing. This facilitates “n” back or “n” post analyses, or masking/priming effects.