reas ofthe 16 nemaoa\EEE EMES Consrene on Revs Engnestng. (Seprisar hay sar 0 2 003 Comparison of Different Feature Cla: F.Cincott!, A. Seipione, A. Timper', D. Mati’, L. Bianchi’, an * Fondazione Santa Lucia- IRCCS, Rome, aly,” Dip. Fsilog Italy, * Swiss Federal Instiute of Technology, CH-1015 Laus La Sapienza", Rome, Italy, Dip. Neur Alsract = Changes in EEG power spectra related to the imagination of movements may be used to build up a direct communication channel between brain and computer (Brain Computer Toterface; BCI). However, forthe | practical Implementation of « BCI device, he feature classifier plays a crucial role. In this paper, we compared the performance of three different feature clamifiers for the detection of the Imagined movements in a group of 6 normal subjects by means the FEG. The feature classifiers compared were those based o the Hidden Markov Models (HMM), the Artifical Nev Nework (ANN) and om the Mahaiandbis distance (MD). Results show a better performance of the MD-and ANN classifiers with respect tothe HMM clair. Keywords - Brain Computer Interface Hidden Markov Model, ‘Artifical Neural Network, Mahalanobis distance 1 InrRopuction In the recent years it has been demonstrated that the ‘opening of a communication channel between brain and ‘computer (Brain Computer Interface; BCI) is possible by using EEG changes in power spectra related to the imagination of movements (reviewed in (1,2) These EEG vanations are specifically located in ceniro-paictal scalp areas and can be recognized by several features clasifirs. Several classifiers have been proposed in the literature for the BCI devices (1]. It is worth of note that most devices ‘operate in a context of synchronous mode, ie by using ‘experimental paradigms in which the user can change the ‘mental state only in particular time instants. Ideally, a BCL device should give the opportunity fo the user to change his mental states in_an_ asynchronous way, without fay restriction of time as it happens in synchronous BCI, However, its not clear ifthe classifiers commonly used in ¢ synchronous BCI could successfully operate in asynchronous Aevices. Hence, although the performances of several feature classifiers have been characterized previously by diferent ‘Authors using synchronous BCI, there are no studies about comparisons of such classifiers for asynchronous BCI devices, In this study we tested the performance of three feature classifies in a context of asynchronous BCI device. The classifiers used are those based on the Mahalanobis distance (3), on Anificial Neural Networls [4] and on Hidden Markov Models [5], Another key issue inthe developing of an efficient BCI device is related to the use of @ minimal umber of electrodes. Hence, the comparison of of the different classifiers was performed by using EEG signals from aredvced set of electtode. 0-7803-7579-3/03/$17.00 © 2003 IEEE 645 ssifiers for Brain Computer Interfaces M. G. Marciani, J. Milli, S. Salinar', 1d F. Babiloni? gia umana e Farmacologia, Université "La Sapienza", Rome, anne, Switzerland, "Dipartimento Informatica ¢Sistemistica, roscienze, Universit Rome, Ialy 1 MetHopoLocy A. BEG recordings and preprocessing ‘The EEG potentials were recorded from a group of 6 normal subjects while they are imaging right or left hand ‘movements. Flectrodes were placed in scalp cento parietal zones comesponding f0 the C3, P3, C& and P4 positions of the intemationl 1020 system. The EEG sampling rate was 128 He. Depending onthe particular study described below, Aitferene subsets of the sealpclectodes were used to seest the features tobe classified ‘The EEG features employed in this study for the comparison ofthe classification performance between all the lassie analyzed were the spectal parameters. More specifically, we used the Welch algorithm to estimate the power specirum of each signal and considered values in the frequency band $30 Hz Windows are 0.5 seconds long, what gives a Fequency resolution of ? Hz. Thus, an EEG Sample i represented by 12 features, where 12 are the specral component foreach one of them channels used. The periodogram, and hence an EEG features vector sample, is Computed every 1/2 second. Ina few subjects for whom a realistic head model based on sequential MR. images was availabe, we estimated the conical activity during the rental imagery task using Tinea estimation algorithm. Svch reconstruction was performed in order to cheek if the electrodes employed in tis study were appropriately located to gather the relevant electrical paters elicited by the subject's mental activity from the cortical surface. B. The Hidden Markow Classifier ‘We considera HMM for which the observe sequence is produced by ast of continuous density process (CD-HMMD, Jn panicular we use a Gaussian density distribution, with covariance matrix bound tobe diagonel For each imagined movement V , considering the observation vectors belonging tothe traning set, we must estimate the parameters set of the HMM 2° that optimize the likelihood of the model. The Baum>-Welch algorithm is used to estimate the parameters of the HMMs. In Estimation- Maximization algorithms, the stating point for the ‘estimation of the matrix of observation symbols probability distribution ®) is extremely important, especially ifthe proces is continuous. This, forthe estimation of B we used ‘segmental kan algritim fora beter evaluation ofthis matnx (6). For each unknown imagined movement to be recognized, te Viterbi Decoder is carved out. The highest Iikelinood HMM is selected as foows0 remax(P(0|2*)) where the probability computation step is performed using the Viterbi algorithm [7}. The Local Ariftat Neural Newwork In our local neural clasifirs, every unit represents a prototype of one ofthe mental asks tobe recognized. During training, unts are pulled towards the EEG samples ofthe senal task they represent and are pushed away fom EEG Samples of other tasks, Ina statistical framework, assuming that each clas-onditional density function is taken to be an independent normal distribution and. dropping. constant terme, the cscriminant faction of clas C for sampler 8: F(x~ Hy)" Eee Hy) thn | Z| +n PCy). @ where P(Cd) denotes the prior probability of class Cy, where 1m, is the prototype (mean) of class Ch, and Sy is the covariance matrix of lass Cy, In practice, this means that a sample is assigned tothe class Cy withthe nearest prototype based on the Mahalanobis distance ‘The initialization of yy and Sis given according to the ‘maximum likelihood approach v4) G-Wo HO) where Ne denotes the number of training samples belonging {o the class Cy Only the diagonal terms of Sy ate computed, in order to keep the sumer offre parameter (and thus the «estimation accuracy) to an acceptable level ‘Using the expectation-maximizaton (EM) framework wwe optimize the position of the prototypes of the differen lasses to minimize mean square error function through fradient descent. Assuming equal prior class probabilities and diagonal covariance matrices, for every samples" inthe ‘ining set i updated by: Atty = eaten (x)= yg Ce EE Ca" — Hy) vee) ¥/ o ‘where fy is the &" component of the target vector in the form Trofe. isthe posterior probability of cass Cy given by Eq.2 and_y isthe probability of the femaining classes Finally, aRer every iteration over the taining sel, we estimate again the new value of Sy using Bg, 3. ‘The response ofthe network is the class Cy associated to the nearest unt from the arving sample provided that ys agreter than a given probability threshold; otherwise the esponse is “unknown? to avoid making risky decisions for uncertain samples. in the ease thatthe classes have several prototypes, then nly the nearest prototype of a class is used for computing the probability ofthat class and for earning D. The Mahalanobis distance-based classifier ‘The classifier was a implementation of the concept of the Mahalanobis distance (MD, (3)). This classifier has only one prototype pet mental task, computed as the mean veetor of | that class estimated using the corresponding EEG samples in the training set. The response ofthe classifier forthe current EEG sample is just the class with the nearest prototype based fn the Mahalanobis distance, which can be computed using the full covariance matrix for each mental ask. E, Statistical analysis ‘To test the recognition capabilities of the classifiers, we employed the Kefold cross-validation procedure for each subject, with k=3. Then, we did a statistical analysis of the average recognition scores. In particular we performed = analysis of variance (ANOVA), by using as dependent variable the classification ate’ obtained by the cross: validation procedure, while the classifiers used as first main factor (CLASSIFIER, with three levels; MD, ANN and HMM). Posthoc tests were performed by using Scheffe's test at p<0.05 level of significance. 1M RESULTS: Figure 1 shows the decrement of spectral power in alpha ‘band in a subject by using a realistic cortical representation based on sequential MR images. The decrement of spectral activity occurs over the centroparetal areas, mainly sampled by the C3, C4, P3 and P4 electrodes. The averaged corect classification scores for the recognition of mental imagery, obtained by using the three ifferent classification methods adopted (MD, ANN and HMM) are 90%, 80%, and 65% respectively ‘The ANOVA performed on these data shows significant decrease of data. variance for the main factor CLASSIFIER (p <0.05). Postchoc tests confirmed the superiority of the MD and ANN classifies with mepect to Figure 1 Estima coil corent ditbation ofthe power of EEG ‘clans ine fegueney ange of 911 fr he set FB dina ‘he eal epery of nigh hand movements gray sel ded om tite ight pay the denynehrontation ofthe enti coment EEC. ‘yt pet the es peed while Hoe igh zy to ak ry is coded he ynhronizac, 646,the HMM classifier (p <0.001). IN. DISCUSSION In this paper we deseribed some of the computational mechanisms useful to detect the imagination of motor acts in normal subjects by using EEG. Results indicate the possibility to recognize mental imagery with fou electrodes by ushg & quadratic classifier based on the computation of Mahalanobis distance ot an artificial neural network with Focal properties. These results are in Tine with recent advancements in the BCI area [1,2]. Besides, we observed that, the performance of the HMM classifiers is, on our ‘sroup of subjects, below the other classifiers. This later observation does not appear to be attributable to.an incorrect model design. Infact, the recognition scores ‘obtained on the traning set are high (about 90% for both of {eft and right mental imagery), Furthermore, the finding of low degree of HMM classifier performance is not in agreement with what already abtained by other Authors, who used 2 HMM based clasifier for the classification of right and lef! mental imagery [5]. Itshould be noted, however, that some differences exist between these two implementations of HMM. For instance, in our implementation, the observed sequence is modeled as being produced by a set of ‘continuous density process, A further remarkable difference resides in the type of experimental paradigm employed. In the aforementioned study, the experimental paradigm was of 1 synchronous type; namely, the subjects were required to perform the given task upon the presentation of a given stimulus, In our ease, the subjects could change task at any moment of the acquisition, allowing a more “natural” utilization ofthe interface, Even though the MD represents the most promising classifier in our experimental context, it should be mentioned that, under different validation conditions which are more similar toa realistic BCI utilization (i. testing date acquired in a session separate and subsequent to training data acquisition}, the performance of the ANN classifier appears not todesie markedly. ‘These considerations converge in the global issue of the benchmarking” of BCI implementation, vhere the choice stands between either to maximize the reproducibility of experiments, (eg. acquisition of a common set of data once for ever) orto optimize acquisition fora given BCT, allowing the subject to take advantage of the feedback feature and thus to contribute with herhhis leering process to the ‘maximization ofthe brain interface performance. [REFERENCES [1] Wolpaw JR, Birbaumer N, McFarland DJ, Pfurscheller G, Vaughan TM. Brain-computer interfaces for communication and control. Clin Neurophysiol. 2002 unt 13(6): 767-91 (2) Pfurtscheller, G. and Neuper, C. (2001). Motor imagery and dicect brain-computet communication, Proceedings ofthe IEEE, 89(7): 123-1134 [3] CincotiF., Mattia D., Babiloni C., Carducei F., Bianchi L., Millan J., Mourino J. Selinari S., Mariani M. and Bibiloni F. Classification of EEG mental pattems by using two scalp electrodes and Mahalanobis distance- based clasifiers, Method of inform. Med., 2002, 41:337- 41 [4] Millan J., Mourio ., Franzé M., Cincoti F., Varsta M. Heikkonen J., Babiloni F., A Local Neural Clasifer for the Recognition of EEG Patterns Associated to Mental “Tasks, IEEE Trans Neural Network2002,(13):678-686 {51 Obermaier B., Guger C., Neuper C. and Pfurtscheller G. Hidden Markov models used forthe offline classification of EEG data, Biomed Tech. 1999 Jun;44(6):158-62 [6 Lawrence R. Rabiner, Jay G. Wilpon and Biing-Hawang Juang. A segmental Kemean training procedure for ‘connected word recognition, AT&T Tech 1986, 65(3):21- 31 7) Lawrence R. Rabiner and Fellow. A tutorial on Hidden Markov. Models and selected applications in speech recognition, Proceedings of the JEEE, Vol. 77, No. 2, February 1989. 647