See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/252006656

EMG pattern recognition using Support Vector Machines classifier for

myoelectric control purposes

Article · March 2011

DOI: 10.1109/PAHCE.2011.5871873

CITATIONS READS
16 1,924

4 authors:

M. Leon Juan Manuel Gutiérrez

Instituto Politécnico Nacional Center for Research and Advanced Studies of the National Polytechnic Institute
4 PUBLICATIONS   34 CITATIONS    47 PUBLICATIONS   683 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

L. Leija Roberto Muñoz

Center for Research and Advanced Studies of the National Polytechnic Institute University of Arkansas
294 PUBLICATIONS   1,442 CITATIONS    152 PUBLICATIONS   1,961 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Early Diagnosis of Diabetic Foot View project

Upper limb intelligent prosthetics View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Juan Manuel Gutiérrez on 14 November 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Multiclass Motion Identification using Myoelectric Signals and Support Vector
Machines
M. León, J.M. Gutiérrez, L. Leija, R. Muñoz
Bioelectronics Section
Department of Electrical Engineering CINVESTAV
07360 Mexico D.F., Mexico
e-mail: mleon@cinvestav.mx
Abstract— In this paper, different classifiers were trained to
identify myoelectric registers, in order to recognize nine
different motions related to four degrees of freedom of the
forearm. Three main methods were compared, namely Linear
Discriminant Analysis, Artificial Neural Networks and
Support Vector Machines. The behavior of pattern recognition
schemes was investigated using different amounts of data
collected from 12 healthy subjects. The focus of this work is to
identify the best classification scheme. Departure information
was obtained using a preprocessing stage to extract either
autoregressive or frequency domain features. Experiments
show that the best performance is achieved employing
frequency features and support vector machine classifier. This
classification scheme demonstrates exceptional recognition
accuracy of over the other methods.
Keywords-component; Myoelectric signal; Support Vector
Machine; Pattern recognition.
I. INTRODUCTION
The Myoelectric Signal (MES), collected at the skin
surface using electrodes, are capable of providing enough
information about neuromuscular activity in a non-invasive
manner. These measured records are an effective source of
prosthetic control [1]. Most works related with signal
classification are focused on improve the accuracy in the
discrimination of movements. In this sense, first developed
systems allowed to establish basic control functions from
estimating the amplitude range or response time of MES [2-
3]. Nowadays, computationally efficient algorithms have
improved the signal processing stage in MES analysis.
Among different reports related with MES classification,
signal processing is often divided in three main stages:
feature extraction, data reduction and pattern recognition
methods.
On the one hand, MES feature extraction can be
accomplished using different techniques such as signal
amplitude, autoregressive coefficients (AR) [4], frequency
and power characteristics obtained of Fast Fourier Transform
(FFT) analysis [5-6], integral of the absolute value [7-8],
time and frequency histograms [9] and wavelet analysis [10-
12]. On the other hand, MES classification is performed
using different techniques to obtain feasible identification
systems. In this sense, it is possible to found applications
using artificial intelligence techniques (i.e. artificial neural
networks, genetic algorithms, fuzzy logic) [13-15] and
statistical classifiers [16]. Recently, Support Vector Machine
978-1-4577-1123-7/11/$26.00 2011
c IEEE
J.M. de la Cruz, M. Santos
Dpto. Arquitectura de Computadores y Automática
Facultad de Fisica, Universidad Complutense de Madrid
28040 Madrid, Spain
e-mail: jmcruz@fis.ucm.es
(SVM) has been shown to improve the performance in
classification tasks. SVM is founded in the framework of the
statistical learning theory, which is appropriate for
approaching classification and regression problems [17-18].
SVM represent a new approach to pattern classification that
has attracted a lot of attention in many real-world
applications ranging from face identification and text
categorization to bioinformatics and data mining [19-20].
The main advantage of SVM is related to their global and
unique solution that allows them to not suffer from the
problem of multiple local minima, such as artificial neural
networks. In addition, the final complexity of these models
does not depend on the dimensionality of the input space.
Since they operate on the induction principle of structural
risk minimization (which minimizes an upper bound on the
generalization error) are less susceptible to the well-known
problem of overfitting.
There are some works describing the use of SVM either
in medical diagnosis [21] or related to myoelectric control
applied to robotic arms and upper limb prosthesis. Crawford
et al. [22] reported the use of SVM for MES classification,
in their work a set of seven single electrodes located in the
forearm muscles were employed in order to distinguishing
eight hand gestures, with the purpose of controlling a robotic
arm with 4 degrees of freedom. Even though their
classification rate was over 90%, only three subjects
participated in the experiment. Similarly, Bitzer and Smagt
have used SVMs to identify six finger actions from a set of
signals obtained with ten active double differential electrodes
located near to the wrist [23], the obtained classification rate
was between 90-94% for relax and pronation arm postures.
Another work developed by Lucas et al. [24], describe a
multi-channel classification problem using eight electrodes
where MES identification was performed to discriminate six
movements of the hand using an approach based on SVM
and wavelet coefficients. Final results show that the optimal
wavelet selection favors the classifier performance, obtaining
an average misclassification rate of 5%. Another report
related with MES classification and SVM was presented by
Naik el al. [25]. This paper reports a novel technique using
Twin SVM (TSVM) [26] that allows to overcome the skew
in class cardinalities. Here the multiclass problem is
addressed using four active differential electrodes an
applying Independent Component Analysis (ICA) to MES
records, in order to recognize seven hand gestures with a
classification performance of 86.02%. In all these works, it is
196
possible to identify a low number of subjects in experimental
sessions. This fact does not assure the robustness of the
employed method.
The aim of this work is to evaluate the feasibility of use
SVM in MES classification problems and as myoelectric
control tool of anthropomorphic arm in the future. To
demonstrate this fact, others classifiers were constructed
using Linear Discriminant Analysis (LDA) and Artificial
Neural Networks (ANN) to compare their performance.
Classification accuracy was investigated using both
autoregressive and frequency domain features. Furthermore,
we compare the classification performance using different
amounts of training and testing data. In this way, final
efficiency and robustness models were also discussed.
The paper is structured as follows. Section II describes
the methodology of MES acquisition, as well as the protocol
used with subjects to generate the different classification
movements. Signal processing, feature extraction and
classifiers are described in Section III. The experimental
results are evaluated and discussed considering the three
different schemes in Section IV. Finally, Section V gives
conclusions and outlook on ongoing work.
II. BACKGROUND
A. Basis of Support Vector Machine
Support Vector Machine (SVM) was initially introduced
by Vapnik and Chervonenkis at 1965. SVM is a supervised
learning technique from the field of machine learning
applicable to both classification and regression. In SVM, the
training is reformulated and represented in such a way to
obtain a quadratic programming problem whose solution is
global and unique. Detailed information about SVM can be
found in [18].
SVM is a binary classifier ݂ǣ ܴே հ ሼേͳሽ that is
estimated by the given empirical data:
( x1 , y1 ) ,..., ( xm , ym ) ∈ R N × {±1} (1)
Nonlinear classification problems are solved by mapping
the original data into a feature space, in which the mapped
data are linearly separable. Function Ԅሺ‫ڄ‬ሻ , which maps
training vector ‫ݔ‬௜ into a higher dimensional space, requires
belonging to dot product space. The dot product of mapping
function is named as kernel:
k ( xi , x j ) = φ ( xi ) φ ( x j )
T
(2)
For a group of data that are mapped into the linearly
separable space, the hyperplanes that divides the data into
two labeled classes are shown as:
wT φ( x) + b = 0
(3)
w ∈ RN , b ∈ R
There are many hyperplanes separating data, but there
exists a unique one yielding the maximum margin of
2011 Third World Congress on Nature and Biologically Inspired Computing
separation between the classes. To construct this optimal
hyperplane, we need to solve the following quadratic
problem:
1 2
m
min w + C ¦ ξi
w, b 2 i =1 (4)
yi ( w φ( xi ) + b ) ≥ 1 − ξi , ξi ≥ 0, i = 1,..., m
T
where ߦ௜ is called the slack variable which takes different
values for each ‫ݔ‬௜ and is related to the concept of soft
margin, meanwhile ‫ ܥ‬is the tuning parameter used to balance
the margin and tolerating errors in the training data. Equation
(4), can be solved by introducing Lagrange multipliers ߙ௜
through next expression:
m
1 m
¦ αi α j yi y j k ( xi , x j )
max ¦ α i −
α 2 i , j =1
i =1
m
(5)
¦ αi yi = 0, 0 ≤ αi ≤ C , ∀i
i =1
Solving (5) leads to the optimal decision function as:
§ m ·
f ( x ) = sgn ¨ ¦ α i yi k ( xi , x ) + b ¸ (6)
© i =1 ¹
The decision function (6) shows that the classifier has an
expansion in terms of a subset of the training data, namely
those patterns whose ߙ௜ is non-zero, called support vectors.
The non-linear mapping can be achieved introducing
different so-called kernel functions, which computes the
inner product of vectors Ԅሺ‫ݔ‬௜ ሻ and Ԅሺ‫ݔ‬௝ ሻ . The typical
kernels functions include lineal, polynomial and radial basis
functions.
B. Multiclass SVM
SVM inherently is a binary classifier and classifies the
samples as being positive or negative. In many applications,
such as limb motions classification is needed to solve
multiclass problems. SVM performs very well for binary
problems, and it is desirable to extend its capabilities into
multiclass problems. Hence, we need a classifier ݂௞ ǣ ܴே հ
ሼͳǡ ǥ ǡ ݇ሽ that estimates the most suitable class upon the
given empirical data:
( x1 , y1 )1 ,..., ( xm , ym )k ∈ R N × {1,..., k } (7)
Probably the simplest scheme for k-class classification
problem is to train k independent binary classifiers that each
one is trained to distinguish the training samples in one class
against the all-remaining classes. To classify a new sample, k
classifiers work separately, and one that outputs the largest
decision function value is chosen as an estimated class. This
scheme is referred to as the one-against-all. It is simple in
implementation, fast in running and produces equal or more
197
accurate results than other methods. Traaining with this
scheme requires k binary SVMs. Another m method is the one-
against-one. In this method, ݇ሺ݇ െ ͳሻȀʹ bbinary classifiers
are trained to separate a pair of two classes. To classify a
new sample, a class that gains more votees of the binary
classifiers is chosen as the final output.
III. METHODOLOGY
A. Data Acquisition
The myoelectric information was storeed in a database
consisting of twelve healthy males subjectts (aged between
22 and 34). The protocol was approved by tthe Health Ethics
Committee at our institution and subjects gave their
informed consent.
Nine motion classes were considered inn this study, these
are related with 4 degrees of freedom of thhe forearm, wrist
and hand (hand close/open, forearm pronnation/supination,
wrist flexion/extension, and wrist radial/ulnaar deviation), and
considering an inactive state. This last m motion class was
acquired with the palm of the hand perppendicular to the
floor, the fingers relaxed and cero degreees flexion of the
wrist. The different motion classes weree recorded by a
custom made four-channel signal condditioning system
coupled with a 12 bit data acquisition card DDAQCard-6024E
(National Instruments).
Four-channel MES were recollected usinng square shaped
disposable surface Ag-AgCl electroodes (Vermed,
Mod.A10043) placed on different muscles as shown in Fig.
1. Each channel considers one pair of eleectrodes with an
inter-electrode spacing of 1.5 cm. An extra electrode is also
place on the elbow providing a referencee. Prior to signal
acquisition, a conditioning stage was considdered, due to the
detected MES on the skin has amplitudes rannging from 50ȝV
to 5mV and frequency response from 20 too 500 Hz [27-28].
This stage has adjustable gain range from 100 to 5000 and
CMRR greater than 96dB. All signals weere acquired in a
laptop using LabVIEW software (National IInstruments) with
a sampling rate of 1024Hz.
Figure 1. Distribution of MES channels: (a) posteerior view and (b)
anterior view. CH1- Extensor digiturum, CH2- Exteensor carpi radialis
lungus, CH3- Flexor carpi radialis and CH4 - Flexxor carpi ulnaris.
Reference electrode is place above the eelbow.
198 2011 Third World Congress on Nature and Biologically Inspired Computing
B. Protocol
A preliminary test session was held
h to properly locate the
surface electrodes for MES measurements.
m For this
objective, the subject was asked to open and close the hand
repeatedly to identify the adequate muscles areas of
registration. After that, the skin waas properly cleaned with
alcohol prior to place the four paiirs of electrodes and the
reference. Once placed the electrod des; they were connected
to the amplifier unit and it was connfirmed that each channel
would deliver a valid MES.
At the beginning of the data acquisition session each
subject was instructed to make the nine different motions
(see Fig. 2) in order to practice thhe series of contractions.
Meanwhile, the amplification gain of the system was fixed
by observing the raw signals to preevent the saturation at the
channels output. The data acquisittion session consisted of
recording fifteen times each motion class (135 records per
subject). During the registratio on period the subject
maintained a contraction of the forearm
f muscles for 15
seconds. Due to the large numberr of motions, there was
necessary to take a break of 1 min every
e 12 records, in order
to avoid fatigue. Each motion was w performed with the
subject standing and the arm extended horizontally.
Figure 2. Motion classes: a) inactive, b) close,
c c) open, d) pronation,e)
supination, f) flexion, g) extension, h) raadial deviation and i) ulnar
deviation.
IV. DATA PROCESSING AND
A MODELLING
A. Data Feature Extraction
Most works related with MES M classification has
considered the steady-stated ME ES recorded during a
maintained contraction, where the record has a stochastic
character and can be expected to beb quasi stationary [29].
Following this consideration all reecords employed in this
work are of steady-state nature.
Obtained information was possterior segmented using
50% overlapped windows of 250 0 ms, equivalent to 119
segments for each register measurred (formed only by the
steady phase). From this informattion a feature extraction
stage was performed, in order to obtain relevant features,
which allow the classification of the
t different movements.
Two mainly analysis were selected to obtain features in both
the time domain and the frequency y domain. Features were
extracted using Autoregressive (AR) features plus the Root
Mean Square (RMS) and Discrete Fourier Transform (DFT)
[1,30].
A total of 20 features for each analysis were obtained (5
from each of the four myoelectric channels) and organized in
feature matrices of dimension (119,20) for each register.
Considering the 15 measured records, each MES class has a
feature matrix dimension of (1785,20).
B. Classification models
From the available information, different classifiers were
built using LDA, ANN and SVM, in order to compare their
classification performance. Each classifier was optimized for
MES classification tasks and trained with 25%, 33.3% and
50% of the information and validated with the remaining
data. On the one hand, final ANN model has an architecture
consisting in 3 layers containing 9 neurons per layer and
using the logsig transfer function in each one. The algorithm
selected for the learning process was backpropagation and
other parameters as learning rate and goal were set to a value
of 0.01 and 1x10-6 respectively. On the other hand, SVM
models were constructed considering one-against-all scheme
and using a radial basis kernel function defined by (8):
These reported results show that ANN and SVM models
have better performance in classification tasks than LDA
models regardless of the information amount used in training
and testing stages. In this sense, using 50% of the total
information for training and the remaining 50% for test,
allows to obtain classifiers with better generalization ability.
Table 2 summarizes the classification percentages and
standard deviation of each model to identify independent
movements using 50% of training data. It can be observed
that LDA + time features accuracy is around 89.42% in the
worst case (supination movement). The benefits of use
frequency features are small compared to time features in
LDA models. Nevertheless, for ANN and SVM models fed
with frequency features show better performance than their
counterparts fed with time features. In this case, the lowest
classification values are 96.51% and 97.23%, while the other
movements have a higher percentage even reaches values of
99.57% and 99.81% for each classifier respectively.
TABLE II. CLASSIFICATION RATE AND STANDARD DEVIATION
OBTAINED WITH LDA, ANN AND SVM MODELS USING 50% OF TRAINING
INFORMATION.
LDA
Motion Class Time Frequency

(
k ( xi , x j ) = exp − xi − x j
2
2σ2 ) (8) (I )
(C)
Inactive
Close
99.14 ± 1.50
98.53 ± 2.65
94.54 ± 3.20
98.95 ± 1.87
(O) Open 91.84 ± 6.80 94.09 ± 5.26
where xi and xj correspond to the testing and support vectors, (P) Pronation 89.87 ± 6.23 90.98 ± 6.02
the parameter σ determine the area of influence of the (S) Supination 89.42 ± 6.73 90.26 ± 6.18
support vector has over the data. Its value was chosen from (F) Flexion 96.48 ± 3.04 96.84 ± 2.75
nine tested values ranging from 0.1 to 4, using as main (E) Extension 97.70 ± 1.93 97.72 ± 2.46
criteria the classification performance and the total number (R) Radial deviation 94.89 ± 3.50 95.36 ± 3.85
of support vectors. This value was finally set to 1. (U) Ulnar deviation 92.60 ± 6.45 92.84 ± 6.40
All classification models and pre-processing stages were
programmed by specific routines in Matlab® 2009b ANN
(Mathworks, Natick. MA, http://www.mathworks.com) Motion Class Time Frequency
programmed by the authors, and using appropriate either
(I ) Inactive 98.66 ± 1.29 99.10 ± 0.59
Neural Network or Signal Processing Toolboxes.
(C) Close 99.72 ± 0.24 99.57 ± 0.48
V. RESULTS (O) Open 95.64 ± 2.99 97.59 ± 1.88
(P) Pronation 95.55 ± 4.42 97.14 ± 3.06
After training different classifiers using time and (S) Supination 95.05 ± 4.30 96.51 ± 3.05
frequency features, the mean classification rate was
(F) Flexion 99.49 ± 0.53 99.52 ± 0.47
calculated for the 9 motions described in the protocol
(E) Extension 99.32 ± 0.46 99.52 ± 0.33
section. Table 1 shows the results of the performance value
(R) Radial deviation 98.39 ± 1.74 99.15 ± 1.02
obtained in the three defined schemes, using different
(U) Ulnar deviation 97.10 ± 1.92 98.50 ± 0.99
amounts of training data.

TABLE I. CLASSIFICATION RATE AND STANDARD SVM

DEVIATION OBTAINED BY DIFERENT CLASSIFIERS. Motion Class Time Frequency
(I ) Inactive 98.58 ± 0.94 99.50 ± 0.46
Classifier Amount of Testing Data
(C) Close 99.73 ± 0.21 99.81 ± 0.16
75% 66.67% 50%
(O) Open 96.69 ± 2.69 97.95 ± 1.91
LDAt 93.17 ± 4.20 93.66 ± 4.06 94.50 ± 3.71
(P) Pronation 96.31 ± 3.74 98.04 ± 2.51
LDAf 94.31 ± 2.97 94.44 ± 2.96 94.62 ± 2.95
(S) Supination 96.80 ± 2.69 97.23 ± 2.59
ANNt 96.81 ± 2.42 97.17 ± 2.20 97.66 ± 1.85
(F) Flexion 99.65 ± 0.39 99.78 ± 0.42
ANNf 97.82 ± 1.64 98.13 ± 1.48 98.51 ± 1.16 (E) Extension 99.55 ± 0.31 99.76 ± 0.22
SVMt 97.44 ± 1.84 97.82 ± 1.67 98.22 ± 1.35 (R) Radial deviation 98.70 ± 1.31 99.51 ± 0.62
SVMf 98.47 ± 1.23 98.66 ± 1.10 98.95 ± 0.97 (U) Ulnar deviation 97.95 ± 1.42 98.96 ± 0.65
a. The letters t and f indicates time and frequency respectively

2011 Third World Congress on Nature and Biologically Inspired Computing 199
 From these results, it is possible to establish that the use showed in the confusion matrix. Other motions such as close,
of frequency features (obtained by DFT analysis) gives flexion and extension don’t have this problem and require a
useful information about MES components. Since DFT is an smaller number of support vectors for their proper
efficient version of Fourier Transform, its implementation in classification.
dedicated devices such as microcontrollers and FPGAs is
also feasible. The high performance obtained in testing
stages of the SVM classifier, allows us to think that this
system can be used as multifunction myoelectric control. In
this sense, the classification scheme based on frequency
features plus SVM brings objective recognition of MES to
identify independent motions.
A graphical representation of the confusion matrix
obtained using SVM and 50% of the available data is given
in Fig. 3. First, it is worth noting that there are three areas
where consistent misclassification occurs. These areas are
related with open (O), pronation (P) and supination (S)
motions. Here is possible to observe that the greater
misclassification is present between S-P motions with around
1.24%, whereas the classes O-P and P-S present a 1.01% and
1.03% respectively. Other misclassification values can be
observed between other motions; nevertheless their values
are less than 0.6%. The discriminative power offered by
SVM shows an appropriate performance in the distinction of
different motions.

Figure 4. SVM model complexity reflected in the number of support

vectors used in each motion class.

Figure 3. SVM Confusion Matrix. Gray scale at the right represents the
classification rate obtained with the model. The main diagonal on figure is
related to the correctly classified motion classes; meanwhile all the
classification errors are represented by off-diagonal elements.
The complexity of the SVM models can be observed
from the number of support vectors used to identify each
class. Fig. 4 shows, different amounts of support vectors
which are needed to identify the analyzed motions. Here it is
possible to observe the minimum and maximum number of
support vectors as well as their mean value, considering the
12 subjects who participated in this study. At the same time,
it can be established that the complexity of the SVM model
increases in the classification of open, pronation and
supination motions. This information confirms the data
VI. CONCLUSIONS
Comparisons of six combinations of feature extraction /
classifiers were analyzed in this work in order to establish
the best myoelectric control strategy. The use of frequency
features and SVM classifiers have shown better classification
accuracy than other combinations using LDA or ANN
classifiers fed with autoregressive features plus RMS or
frequency features. These reported results were consistent
even using a different amount of data for the testing stage.
The application of this method employing four MES
channels allowed the discrimination of 9 motion classes with
an average misclassification rate of 1.53% and a standard
deviation of 1.08.
Even though the method proposed allowed the
classification of 9 motion classes with high classification
rate, the simultaneous control of multiple degrees of freedom
of an anthropomorphic arm represents a more complex
myoelectric control problem. This might be addressed by
selecting a better feature extraction method or increasing the
number of MES channels. Currently this is a research work
in progress in our group.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Financial support for this work was provided by the
Mexican National Council of Science and Technology
CONACYT (Mexico) thorough doctoral scholarship and to
the Instituto Politecnico Nacional for the support received
during the M. León stay in the UCM (Madrid).

200 2011 Third World Congress on Nature and Biologically Inspired Computing
 REFERENCES [21] G. Kaur, A. S. Arora, and V. K. Jain, "Multi-class support vector
machine classifier in EMG diagnosis," WSEAS Trans. Sig. Proc., vol.
[1] Y. Huang, K. B. Englehart, B. Hudgins, and A. D. Chan, "A Gaussian 5, pp. 379-389, 2009.
mixture model based classification scheme for myoelectric control of
powered upper limb prostheses," IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng., vol. 52, [22] B. Crawford, K. Miller, P. Shenoy, and R. Rao, "Real-time
pp. 1801-1811, Nov 2005. classification of electromyographic signals for robotic control," Proc.
20th Nat. Conf. Artificial Intell. (AAAI 05), 2006, pp. 523-528.
[2] R. N. Scott and P. A. Parker, "Myoelectric Prostheses: state of the
art," J. Med. Eng. Technol., vol. 12, pp. 143-151, Jul-Aug 1988. [23] S. Bitzer and P. van der Smagt, "Learning EMG control of a robotic
hand: towards active prostheses," Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Robotics and
[3] U. Kuruganti, B. Hudgins, and R. N. Scott, "Two-channel Automation (ICRA 06), 2006, pp. 2819-2823.
enhancement of a multifunction control system," IEEE Trans.
Biomed. Eng., vol. 42, pp. 109-111, Jan 1995. [24] M.-F. Lucas, A. Gaufriau, S. Pascual, C. Doncarli, and D. Farina,
"Multi-channel surface EMG classification using support vector
[4] A. Asres, D. Huifang, Z. Zhaoying, Z. Yuli, and Z. Sencun, "A machines and signal-based wavelet optimization," Biomed. Signal
combination of AR and neural network technique for EMG pattern Process. Control, vol. 3, pp. 169-174, 2008.
identification," Proc. 18th Annu. Int. Conf. IEEE Eng. Medicine and
Biology Soc., 1996, pp. 1464-1465. [25] G. R. Naik, D. K. Kumar, and Jayadeva, "Twin SVM for Gesture
Classification Using the Surface Electromyogram," IEEE Trans. Inf.
[5] K. Kuribayashi, K. Okimura, and T. Taniguchi, "A discrimination Technol. Biomed., vol. 14, pp. 301-308, Mar 2010.
system using neural network for EMG-controlled prostheses," IEEE
Int. Workshop Robot and Human Comm., 1992. Proc., 1992, pp. 63- [26] Jayadeva, R. Khemchandani, and S. Chandra, "Twin Support Vector
68. Machines for Pattern Classification," IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal.
Mach. Intell., vol. 29, pp. 905-910, May 2007.
[6] A. Hiraiwa, K. Shimohara, and Y. Tokunaga, "EMG pattern analysis
and classification by neural network," IEEE Int. Conf. Systems, Man [27] J. V. Basmajian and C. J. D. Luca, Muscles Alive: Their Functions
and Cybernetics, 1989, pp. 1113-1115. Revealed by Electromyography, 5th ed., Baltimore, MD: Williams &
Wilkins, 1985.
[7] K. Kuribayashi, S. Shimizu, K. Okimura, and T. Taniguchi, "A
discrimination system using neural network for EMG-controlled [28] J. D. Bronzino, The Biomedical Engineering Handbook, Salem, MA:
CRC Press, 1995.
prostheses-Integral type of EMG signal processing," Proc. 1993
IEEE/RSJ Int. Conf. Intelligent Robots and Syst. (IROS 93), 1993, [29] K. Englehart, B. Hudgins, and P. A. Parker, "Time-frequency based
pp. 1750-1755. classification of the myoelectric signal: static vs. dynamic
[8] T. Khoshaba, K. Badie, and R. M. Hashemi, "EMG Pattern contractions," Eng. Medicine and Biology Soc., 2000. Proc. 22nd
Annu. Int. Conf. IEEE, 2000, pp. 317-320.
Classification Based On Back Propagation Neural Network For
Prosthesis Control," Proc. 12th Annu. Int. Conf. IEEE Eng. Medicine [30] D. Nishikawa, W. Yu, H. Yokoi, and Y. Kakazu, "On-line learning
and Biology Soc., 1990, 1990, pp. 1474-1475. method for EMG prosthetic hand control," Electronics and
[9] P. Prociow, A. Wolczowski, T. G. B. Amaral, O. P. Dias, and J. Communications in Japan (Part III: Fundamental Electronic Science),
vol. 84, pp. 35-46, 2001.
Filipe, "Identification of Hand Movements based on MMG and EMG
Signals," BIOSIGNALS 08, 2008, pp. 534-539.
[10] X. Hu, Z. Wang, and X. Ren, "Classification of surface EMG signal
using relative wavelet packet energy," Comput. Meth. Prog. Bio., vol.
79, pp. 189-195, Sep 2005.
[11] V. von Tscharner, "Spherical classification of wavelet transformed
EMG intensity patterns," J. Electromyogr. Kines., vol. 19, pp. e334-
e344, Oct 2009.
[12] G. Vannozzi, S. Conforto, and T. D'Alessio, "Automatic detection of
surface EMG activation timing using a wavelet transform based
method," J. Electromyogr. Kines., vol. 20, pp. 767-772, Aug 2010.
[13] K. Englehart, B. Hudgins, M. Stevenson, and P. A. Parker,
"Classification of myoelectric signal burst patterns using a dynamic
neural network," Bioengineering Conf., Proc. 1995 IEEE 21st Annu.
Northeast, 1995, pp. 63-64.
[14] K. A. Farry, I. D. Walker, and R. G. Baraniuk, "Myoelectric
teleoperation of a complex robotic hand," IEEE Trans. Rob. Autom.,
vol. 12, pp. 775-788, Oct 1996.
[15] R. F. Weir and A. B. Ajiboye, "A multifunction prosthesis controller
based on fuzzy-logic techniques," Proc. 25th Annu. Int. Conf. IEEE
Eng. Medicine and Biology Soc., 2003, pp. 1678-1681.
[16] S. Solnik, P. Devita, K. Grzegorczyk, A. Koziatek, and T. Bober,
"EMG frequency during isometric, submaximal activity: a statistical
model for biceps brachii," Acta Bioeng. Biomech., vol. 12, pp. 21-28,
2010.
[17] C. Cortes and V. Vapnik, "Support-vector networks," Mach. Learn.,
vol. 20, pp. 273-297, Sep 1995.
[18] V. N. Vapnik, Statistical Learning Theory, Danvers, MA: Wiley-
Interscience, 1998.
[19] M. A. Hearst, S. T. Dumais, E. Osman, J. Platt, and B. Scholkopf,
"Support vector machines," IEEE Intell. Syst., vol. 13, pp. 18-28, Jul-
Aug 1998.
[20] G. Dror, R. Sorek, and R. Shamir, "Accurate identification of
alternatively spliced exons using support vector machine,"
Bioinformatics, vol. 21, pp. 897-901, Apr 2005.

2011 Third World Congress on Nature and Biologically Inspired Computing 201

View publication stats