CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 13EEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesMuscle activation and electromyography studiesStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery

Supervised Classification of EEG Signals with Score Threshold Regulation for Pseudo-Online Asynchronous Detection of Gait Intention

Hasan, S M Shafiul, Siddiquee, Masudur R., Bai, Ou·2019·2019 18th IEEE International Conference On Machine Learning And Applications (ICMLA)
DOI 10.1109/icmla.2019.00242
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

In neurorehabilitation systems, early detection of gait intention with a lower false-positive rate and higher sensitivity is a critical factor which dictates the successful operation of the exoskeleton or assistive system. Traditional supervised learning algorithms often fail to reach these goals due to the lack of ability to adapt to the diverse interaction between the external environment and the human user. A threshold regulation approach might be a simple yet significant addition to increasing the adaptability of the intention detection system. In this paper, the performance of a pseudo-online BCI system in asynchronous detection of human gait intention from movement-related Electroencephalography signals is investigated. Seven healthy individuals participated in the study who performed self-paced cycles of gait initiation and termination in multiple trials. A custom-made eight-channel EEG system was used to capture the movement-related neural signals while a pair of in-sole pressure sensors and an Electromyography (EMG) sensor were used for time locking the actual moments of movement onset and termination. A wavelet transform based method along with Hjorth parameters, was employed to extract informative features which were then used to train an SVM-RBF classifier with threshold regulation for asynchronous detection of gait intention. A high true positive rate, low false-positive rate, and very low latency were achieved by the proposed methodology. The results demonstrate the feasibility of the proposed framework in building a human-in-the-loop neurorehabilitation system.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/icmla.2019.00242

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Hasan, S. M. S., Siddiquee, M. R., & Bai, O.
Affiliations
Florida International University (US)
ORCID
Venue
2019 18th IEEE International Conference On Machine Learning And Applications (ICMLA)
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2019-12
Pages
1476-1479
DOI
10.1109/icmla.2019.00242
OpenAlex
W3007358434
Cited by
13
References
10
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 6
FWCI
3.88
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
International Conference on Machine Learning and Applications (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Muscle activation and electromyography studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Keywords
movement-related potentials, EEG, brain-computer interface, asynchronous detection, neurorehabilitation, exoskeleton control, wavelet features, Hjorth parameters, false positive reduction, human-in-the-loop control

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review