2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.compbiomed.2017.10.025
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

CSP-TSM: Optimizing the performance of Riemannian tangent space mapping using common spatial pattern for MI-BCI

Abstract: The proposed CSP-TSM method produces promising results when compared with several competing methods in this paper. In addition, the computational complexity is less compared to that of TSM method. Our proposed CSP-TSM framework can be potentially used for developing improved MI-BCI systems.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
31
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 72 publications
(33 citation statements)
references
References 68 publications
2
31
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Mutual information-based method (Ang et al, 2012 ) automatically optimizes the time windows and frequency ranges, by calculating the MUIN variable between the spatial and temporal features reflected by the EEG data and the activity of the corresponding micro-neurons. CSP-tangent space mapping (TSM) algorithm (Kumar et al, 2017 ) is proposed by utilizing Riemannian tangent space information for extracting features.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Mutual information-based method (Ang et al, 2012 ) automatically optimizes the time windows and frequency ranges, by calculating the MUIN variable between the spatial and temporal features reflected by the EEG data and the activity of the corresponding micro-neurons. CSP-tangent space mapping (TSM) algorithm (Kumar et al, 2017 ) is proposed by utilizing Riemannian tangent space information for extracting features.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Our previous study has also shown that choosing the optimal time window for each subject can indeed improve the classification accuracy [40]. Although the optimal time windows of each subject's MI are different, it is found that the time between 0-2.5 s after the onset of visual cue can benefit the classification considering adequate sample points for subsequent data processing [41]. In this study, data between 0.5-2.5s (Subject 3 takes 0.5-2.7 s, Subject 5 takes 0.5-2.6 s) after the onset of the visual cue direction were used.…”
Section: A Time Window Selectionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A fixed time window (0.5-2.5 s with respect to the onset of cues) was usually used in the CSP for feature extraction [44], [45]. This is not very reasonable because the temporal course of brain activity responding to motor imagery is not exact the same and varies from one subject to another.…”
Section: A Time Windows For Spatial Patternsmentioning
confidence: 99%