↓ Skip to main content

Hybrid ICA—Regression: Automatic Identification and Removal of Ocular Artifacts from Electroencephalographic Signals

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
58 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Hybrid ICA—Regression: Automatic Identification and Removal of Ocular Artifacts from Electroencephalographic Signals
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, May 2016
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2016.00193
Pubmed ID
Authors

Malik M. Naeem Mannan, Myung Y. Jeong, Muhammad A. Kamran

Abstract

Electroencephalography (EEG) is a portable brain-imaging technique with the advantage of high-temporal resolution that can be used to record electrical activity of the brain. However, it is difficult to analyze EEG signals due to the contamination of ocular artifacts, and which potentially results in misleading conclusions. Also, it is a proven fact that the contamination of ocular artifacts cause to reduce the classification accuracy of a brain-computer interface (BCI). It is therefore very important to remove/reduce these artifacts before the analysis of EEG signals for applications like BCI. In this paper, a hybrid framework that combines independent component analysis (ICA), regression and high-order statistics has been proposed to identify and eliminate artifactual activities from EEG data. We used simulated, experimental and standard EEG signals to evaluate and analyze the effectiveness of the proposed method. Results demonstrate that the proposed method can effectively remove ocular artifacts as well as it can preserve the neuronal signals present in EEG data. A comparison with four methods from literature namely ICA, regression analysis, wavelet-ICA (wICA), and regression-ICA (REGICA) confirms the significantly enhanced performance and effectiveness of the proposed method for removal of ocular activities from EEG, in terms of lower mean square error and mean absolute error values and higher mutual information between reconstructed and original EEG.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Unknown 56 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 38%
Student > Master 7 12%
Researcher 6 10%
Professor 3 5%
Lecturer 3 5%
Other 8 14%
Unknown 9 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 26 45%
Computer Science 10 17%
Neuroscience 4 7%
Social Sciences 1 2%
Arts and Humanities 1 2%
Other 2 3%
Unknown 14 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 May 2016.
All research outputs
#18,455,405
of 22,867,327 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#6,077
of 7,165 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#218,703
of 298,754 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#156
of 170 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,867,327 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,165 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 298,754 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 170 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.