Latency estimation of auditory brainstem response by neural networks

In the clinical application of auditory brainstem responses (ABRs), the latencies of five to seven main peaks are extremely important parameters for diagnosis. In practice, the latencies have mainly been done by manual measurement so far. In recent years, some new techniques have been developed involving automatic computer recognition. Computer recognition is difficult, however, since some peaks are complicated and vary a lot individually. In this paper, we introduce an artificial neural network method for ABR research. The detection of ABR is performed by using artificial neural networks. A proper bandpass filter is designed for peak extraction. Moreover, a new approach to estimate the latencies of the peaks by artificial neural networks is presented. The neural networks are studied in relation to the selection of model, number of layers and number of neurons in each hidden layer. Experimental results are described showing that artificial neural networks are a promising method in the study of ABR.

[1]  James A. Reggia,et al.  Neural computation in medicine , 1993, Artif. Intell. Medicine.

[2]  R Sánchez,et al.  Automatic detection of auditory brainstem responses using feature vectors. , 1995, International journal of bio-medical computing.

[3]  G. P. Madhavan,et al.  Use of attributed grammars for pattern recognition of evoked potentials , 1988, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern..

[4]  R A Dobie,et al.  Objective Response Detection , 1993, Ear and hearing.

[5]  J B Habraken,et al.  Identification of peak V in brainstem auditory evoked potentials with neural networks. , 1993, Computers in biology and medicine.

[6]  S S Saunders,et al.  Evoked potentials: computer-automated threshold-tracking procedure using an objective detection criterion. , 1987, Ear and hearing.

[7]  J. Cadzow,et al.  Singular-value decomposition approach to time series modelling , 1983 .

[8]  M Juhola,et al.  On digital filtering of auditory brainstem responses. , 1993, Medical progress through technology.

[9]  Özcan Özdamar,et al.  Auditory brainstem evoked potential classification for threshold detection by neural networks. I. Network design, similarities between human-expert and network classification, feasibility , 1992 .

[10]  Ah Chung Tsoi,et al.  Efficacy of modified backpropagation and optimisation methods on a real-world medical problem , 1995, Neural Networks.

[11]  T Grönfors,et al.  Peak identification of auditory brainstem responses with multi-filters and attributed automaton. , 1993, Computer methods and programs in biomedicine.

[12]  M E Jernigan,et al.  Classification of brain-stem auditory evoked potentials by syntactic methods. , 1986, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[13]  E R John,et al.  Application of digital filtering and automatic peak detection to brain stem auditory evoked potential. , 1982, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[14]  Ezio Biglieri,et al.  Some properties of singular value decomposition and their applications to digital signal processing , 1989 .

[15]  M.H. Hassoun,et al.  Fundamentals of Artificial Neural Networks , 1996, Proceedings of the IEEE.

[16]  ERKKI OJA,et al.  The ALSM algorithm - an improved subspace method of classification , 1983, Pattern Recognit..

[17]  Özcan Özdamar,et al.  Auditory brainstem evoked potential classification for threshold detection by neural networks. II. Effects of input coding, training set size and composition and network size on performance , 1992 .

[18]  D L Jewett,et al.  Auditory-evoked far fields averaged from the scalp of humans. , 1971, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[19]  H Pratt,et al.  Auditory brainstem evoked potentials peak identification by finite impulse response digital filters. , 1989, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.