Cart (Loading....) | Create Account
Close category search window
 

Quantitative evaluation of ocular artifact removal methods based on real and estimated EOG signals

Sign In

Cookies must be enabled to login.After enabling cookies , please use refresh or reload or ctrl+f5 on the browser for the login options.

Formats Non-Member Member
$31 $13
Learn how you can qualify for the best price for this item!
Become an IEEE Member or Subscribe to
IEEE Xplore for exclusive pricing!
close button

puzzle piece

IEEE membership options for an individual and IEEE Xplore subscriptions for an organization offer the most affordable access to essential journal articles, conference papers, standards, eBooks, and eLearning courses.

Learn more about:

IEEE membership

IEEE Xplore subscriptions

3 Author(s)
Noureddin, B. ; Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada V6T ; Lawrence, P.D. ; Birch, G.E.

We propose a novel metric for quantitatively evaluating ocular artifact (OA) removal methods on real electroencephalogram (EEG) data. For real EEG, existing metrics measure the amount of artifact removed. Our metric measures how much a given method is likely to distort the underlying EEG. The new metric was used to evaluate two existing OA removal algorithms that use the electro-oculogram (EOG) as a reference signal. The combination of a previous metric and our new metric showed there is a trade-off between how well an algorithm removes OAs and how likely it is to distort the underlying EEG. These algorithms require a reference EOG signal, yet for certain applications (e.g., a brain computer interface or BCI) it is preferable or necessary to avoid attaching electrodes around the eyes. We thus also used various combinations of up to 55 channels of EEG to estimate the EOG reference. The metric was again used to compare the use of estimated vs. measured EOG. Our initial results showed that using EOG estimated from as few as 4 EEG electrodes increased the likelihood of distorting the EEG from 14% to 19% and from 21% to 23% for the two algorithms. For some applications (e.g., BCI), the slight reduction in performance may be acceptable in order to avoid using EOG electrodes.

Published in:

Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, 2008. EMBS 2008. 30th Annual International Conference of the IEEE

Date of Conference:

20-25 Aug. 2008

Need Help?


IEEE Advancing Technology for Humanity About IEEE Xplore | Contact | Help | Terms of Use | Nondiscrimination Policy | Site Map | Privacy & Opting Out of Cookies

A not-for-profit organization, IEEE is the world's largest professional association for the advancement of technology.
© Copyright 2014 IEEE - All rights reserved. Use of this web site signifies your agreement to the terms and conditions.