P300 Wave Detection Based on Rough Sets

The goal of P300 wave detection is to extract relevant features from the huge number of electrical signals and to detect the P300 component accurately. This paper introduces a modified approach to P300 wave detection combined with an application of rough set methods and non-rough set based methods to classify P300 signals. The modifications include an averaging method using Mexican hat wavelet coefficients to extract features of signals. The data set has been expanded to include signals from six words and a total of 3960 objects. Experiments with a variety of classifiers were performed. The signal data analysis includes comparisons of error rates, true positives and false negatives performed using a paired t-test. It has been found that the false negatives are better indicators of efficacy of the feature extraction method rather than error rate due to the nature of the signal data. The contribution of this paper is an in-depth study P300 wave detection using a modified averaging method for feature extraction together with rough set-based classification on an expanded data set.

[1]  J.D. Bayliss,et al.  Use of the evoked potential P3 component for control in a virtual apartment , 2003, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[2]  Jerzy W. Grzymala-Busse,et al.  Transactions on Rough Sets I , 2004, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[3]  Sinh Hoa Nguyen,et al.  Learning Sunspot Classification , 2006, Fundam. Informaticae.

[4]  U. Hoffmann,et al.  A Boosting Approach to P300 Detection with Application to Brain-Computer Interfaces , 2005, Conference Proceedings. 2nd International IEEE EMBS Conference on Neural Engineering, 2005..

[5]  Andrzej Skowron,et al.  Transactions on Rough Sets III , 2005, Trans. Rough Sets.

[6]  E. Donchin,et al.  Talking off the top of your head: toward a mental prosthesis utilizing event-related brain potentials. , 1988, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[7]  R. Johnson,et al.  Developmental evidence for modality-dependent P300 generators: a normative study. , 1989, Psychophysiology.

[8]  J. Ross Quinlan,et al.  Induction of Decision Trees , 1986, Machine Learning.

[9]  W. Ziarko,et al.  Incremental learning with hierarchies of rough decision tables , 2004, IEEE Annual Meeting of the Fuzzy Information, 2004. Processing NAFIPS '04..

[10]  E Donchin,et al.  The mental prosthesis: assessing the speed of a P300-based brain-computer interface. , 2000, IEEE transactions on rehabilitation engineering : a publication of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society.

[11]  Jerzy W. Grzymala-Busse,et al.  LERS-A System for Learning from Examples Based on Rough Sets , 1992, Intelligent Decision Support.

[12]  Lech Polkowski,et al.  Rough Sets in Knowledge Discovery 2 , 1998 .

[13]  Jerzy W. Grzymala-Busse,et al.  Rough Sets , 1995, Commun. ACM.

[14]  Andrew McCallum,et al.  Dynamic conditional random fields: factorized probabilistic models for labeling and segmenting sequence data , 2004, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[15]  Michael Snodgrass,et al.  Subliminal visual oddball stimuli evoke a P300 component , 2001, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[16]  Sheela Ramanna,et al.  Classification of Swallowing Sound Signals: A Rough Set Approach , 2004, Rough Sets and Current Trends in Computing.

[17]  P. J. Green,et al.  Probability and Statistical Inference , 1978 .

[18]  J. Polich,et al.  Comparison of infant and adult P300 from auditory stimuli. , 1992, Journal of experimental child psychology.

[19]  J. Polich,et al.  Comparison of P300 from passive and active tasks for auditory and visual stimuli. , 1999, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[20]  Ulrich Hegerl,et al.  Neurochemical Substrates and Neuroanatomical Generators of the Event-Related P300 , 1999, Neuropsychobiology.

[21]  E. John,et al.  Evoked-Potential Correlates of Stimulus Uncertainty , 1965, Science.

[22]  William W. Cohen.  Fast Effective Rule Induction , 1995, ICML.

[23]  Klaus-Robert Müller,et al.  The BCI competition 2003: progress and perspectives in detection and discrimination of EEG single trials , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[24]  Reza Fazel-Rezai,et al.  Brain Signals: Feature Extraction and Classification Using Rough Set Methods , 2005, RSFDGrC.

[25]  R. Słowiński.  Intelligent Decision Support: Handbook of Applications and Advances of the Rough Sets Theory , 1992 .

[26]  E. Halgren,et al.  The intracranial topography of the P3 event-related potential elicited during auditory oddball. , 1990, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[27]  R. Fazel-Rezai,et al.  P300 wave feature extraction: preliminary results , 2005, Canadian Conference on Electrical and Computer Engineering, 2005..

[28]  J. Polich,et al.  P300 amplitude is determined by target-to-target interval. , 2002, Psychophysiology.

[29]  Andrzej Skowron,et al.  Layered Learning for Concept Synthesis , 2004, Trans. Rough Sets.

[30]  G.E. Birch,et al.  A general framework for brain-computer interface design , 2003, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[31]  Jakub Wróblewski,et al.  Genetic Algorithms in Decomposition and Classification Problems , 1998 .

[32]  J. Polich,et al.  Auditory and visual P300 topography from a 3 stimulus paradigm , 1999, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[33]  Sadaaki Miyamoto,et al.  Rough Sets and Current Trends in Computing , 2012, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[34]  Marcin S. Szczuka,et al.  The Rough Set Exploration System , 2005, Trans. Rough Sets.