The DOI matches its Crossref record; 36 of the 36 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Identifying key factors for improving ICA‐based decomposition of EEG data in mobile and stationary experiments
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
Recent developments in EEG hardware and analyses approaches allow for recordings in both stationary and mobile settings. Irrespective of the experimental setting, EEG recordings are contaminated with noise that has to be removed before the data can be functionally interpreted. Independent component analysis (ICA) is a commonly used tool to remove artifacts such as eye movement, muscle activity, and external noise from the data and to analyze activity on the level of EEG effective brain sources. The effectiveness of filtering the data is one key preprocessing step to improve the decomposition that has been investigated previously. However, no study thus far compared the different requirements of mobile and stationary experiments regarding the preprocessing for ICA decomposition. We thus evaluated how movement in EEG experiments, the number of channels, and the high‐pass filter cutoff during preprocessing influence the ICA decomposition. We found that for commonly used settings (stationary experiment, 64 channels, 0.5 Hz filter), the ICA results are acceptable. However, high‐pass filters of up to 2 Hz cut‐off frequency should be used in mobile experiments, and more channels require a higher filter to reach an optimal decomposition. Fewer brain ICs were found in mobile experiments, but cleaning the data with ICA has been proved to be important and functional even with low‐density channel setups. Based on the results, we provide guidelines for different experimental settings that improve the ICA decomposition.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Delorme, A., & Makeig, S. (2004) · Journal of Neuroscience Methods · doi:10.1016/j.jneumeth.2003.10.009 · Cited by 24,371
An Information-Maximization Approach to Blind Separation and Blind Deconvolution
Bell, A. J., & Sejnowski, T. J. (1995) · Neural Computation · doi:10.1162/neco.1995.7.6.1129 · Cited by 8,986
Independent component analysis: algorithms and applications
Hyvärinen, A., & Oja, E. (2000) · Neural Networks · doi:10.1016/s0893-6080(00)00026-5 · Cited by 8,705
Independent Component Analysis
(2004) · Independent Component Analysis · doi:10.7551/mitpress/3717.003.0014 · Cited by 7,903
Independent Component Analysis
Hyvärinen, A., Karhunen, J., & Oja, E. (2001) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/0471221317 · Cited by 5,007
ICLabel: An automated electroencephalographic independent component classifier, dataset, and website
Pion-Tonachini, L., Kreutz-Delgado, K., & Makeig, S. (2019) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2019.05.026 · Cited by 2,267
Blind separation of auditory event-related brain responses into independent components
Makeig, S., Jung, T.-P., Bell, A. J., Ghahremani, D., & Sejnowski, T. J. (1997) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.94.20.10979 · Cited by 1,206
Independent EEG Sources Are Dipolar
Delorme, A., Palmer, J., Onton, J., Oostenveld, R., & Makeig, S. (2012) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0030135 · Cited by 810
Digital filter design for electrophysiological data – a practical approach
Widmann, A., Schröger, E., & Maess, B. (2015) · Journal of Neuroscience Methods · doi:10.1016/j.jneumeth.2014.08.002 · Cited by 711
Chang, C.-Y., Hsu, S.-H., Pion-Tonachini, L., & Jung, T.-P. (2020) · IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering · doi:10.1109/tbme.2019.2930186 · Cited by 544
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- 10.1109/SMC.2019.8914292 · doi:10.1109/smc.2019.8914292
- Gramann K., 2018, Heading Computation in the Human Retrosplenial Complex during full‐body Rotation, bioRxiv, 417972
- 10.1109/NER.2019.8716959 · doi:10.1109/ner.2019.8716959
Cited by
Decoding Covert Speech From EEG-A Comprehensive Review
Panachakel, J. T., & Ramakrishnan, A. G. (2021) · Frontiers in Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnins.2021.642251 · Cited by 156
Spontaneous dyadic behavior predicts the emergence of interpersonal neural synchrony
Koul, A., Ahmar, D., Iannetti, G. D., & Novembre, G. (2023) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2023.120233 · Cited by 75
Billeci, L., Callara, A. L., Guiducci, L., Prosperi, M., Morales, M. A., Calderoni, S., Muratori, F., & Santocchi, E. (2023) · Autism · doi:10.1177/13623613221082710 · Cited by 69
Palacios‐García, I., Mhuireach, G. A., Grasso‐Cladera, A., Cryan, J. F., & Parada, F. J. (2022) · BioEssays · doi:10.1002/bies.202100249 · Cited by 14
Metadata
- Authors
- Klug, M., & Gramann, K.
- Venue
- European Journal of Neuroscience
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2020-10-15
- Volume
- 54
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 8406-8420
- ISSN
- 0953-816X (ISSN-L)
- 1460-9568
- OpenAlex
- W3090156323
- Cited by
- 268
- References
- 36
- FWCI
- 12.39
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- Funders
- U.S. Air Force (ONR 10024807)
- Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (GR2627/8‐1)
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Identifying key factors for improving ICA‐based decomposition of EEG data in mobile and stationary experiments. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/ejn.14992
- The paper
- Klug, M., & Gramann, K. (2021). Identifying key factors for improving ICA‐based decomposition of EEG data in mobile and stationary experiments. European Journal of Neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejn.14992
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.