↓ Skip to main content

Relevant Feature Integration and Extraction for Single-Trial Motor Imagery Classification

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroscience, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
18 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
Relevant Feature Integration and Extraction for Single-Trial Motor Imagery Classification
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroscience, June 2017
DOI 10.3389/fnins.2017.00371
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lili Li, Guanghua Xu, Feng Zhang, Jun Xie, Min Li

Abstract

Brain computer interfaces provide a novel channel for the communication between brain and output devices. The effectiveness of the brain computer interface is based on the classification accuracy of single trial brain signals. The common spatial pattern (CSP) algorithm is believed to be an effective algorithm for the classification of single trial brain signals. As the amplitude feature for spatial projection applied by this algorithm is based on a broad frequency bandpass filter (mainly 5-30 Hz) in which the frequency band is often selected by experience, the CSP is sensitive to noise and the influence of other irrelevant information in the selected broad frequency band. In this paper, to improve the CSP, a novel relevant feature integration and extraction algorithm is proposed. Before projecting, we integrated the motor relevant information to suppress the interference of noise and irrelevant information, as well as to improve the spatial difference for projection. The algorithm was evaluated with public datasets. It showed significantly better classification performance with single trial electroencephalography (EEG) data, increasing by 6.8% compared with the CSP.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

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 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 18 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 33%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 22%
Researcher 2 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 6%
Unknown 5 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 4 22%
Engineering 4 22%
Neuroscience 3 17%
Unknown 7 39%
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 10 July 2017.
All research outputs
#20,660,571
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#9,459
of 11,542 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#253,539
of 328,273 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#167
of 193 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,542 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.0. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% 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 328,273 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 193 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.