You are on page 1of 7

JOURNAL OF COMPUTING, VOLUME 3, ISSUE 5, MAY 2011, ISSN 2151-9617 HTTPS://SITES.GOOGLE.

COM/SITE/JOURNALOFCOMPUTING/ WWW.JOURNALOFCOMPUTING.ORG

160

Assessment of Non-Parametric and Parametric PSD Estimation Methods for Automated Epileptic Seizure Detection
Girisha Garg, Sonakshi Behl, and Vijander Singh
Abstract--This paper explores the feasibility and accuracy of using several power spectral estimation methods for the analysis of Electroencephalogram (EEG) signals to distinguish the EEG of an epileptic person from that of a normal person .The features representing the EEG signals (both normal and epileptic) were extracted from the Power Spectral Density (PSD) obtained from methods namely---Non-Parametric methods(Welch, Periodogram Algorithms) and Parametric methods(Burg, Yule-Walker ,Covariance Algorithms). In addition to this, the Mahalanobis distance based classification (MDBC) technique was employed to classify the two classes of EEG signals on the basis of the extracted features. Some conclusions were drawn concerning the most accurate method for epilepsy detection. Index Terms— Electroencephalogram, Epilepsy, Discriminant Analysis, Power Specral Density, Spectral Estimation,

——————————  ——————————

1 INTRODUCTION

T

HE Electroencephalogram (EEG) is a recording of the spontaneous electrical activity of a human brain in the form of signals. These signals are generated by the nerve cells present in the cerebral cortex of the human brain. In Neurology, EEG is the most valuable tool for diagnosis and treatment of epilepsy as any epileptic activity creates abnormalities on a standard EEG study. With the number of patients worldwide suffering from epilepsy increasing every year, it is imperative to develop a highly robust, accurate and reliable automatic epilepsy detection system that could significantly reduce the time required by a neurologist to review extensive EEG data. In the past, extensive research has been carried out on EEG signals .Several methods have been proposed to automatically detect epilepsy by analysing EEG data. The entire procedure of methodologies adopted by the researchers can be divided into four steps: Signal Acquisition, Signal Pre-processing, Feature Selection and Classification. In the Signal Pre-processing Module, after obtaining the EEG signal of the patient, several operations for e.g. artefact removing, edge detection, noise removal and averaging are performed for signal enhancement. The feature extraction module deals with extraction of useful information from the signal based on several criteria, which are best for classification between a normal and an epileptic EEG. Features are selected based on either 1) best representation of a given class of signal, or 2) best

distinction between two classes. In the last module i.e. Classification, a classifying technique is used to decide if the test EEG signal belongs to which class-Normal or epileptic , based on the features extracted from the previous stage [1],[2]. The four factors on which the performance of an EEGbased epilepsy detection model depends are: (1) the EEG features, (2) the feature extraction/reduction methods, (3) the classifiers, and (4) the number of data classes to be classified.This necessitates an optimum selection for the feature extraction and classification methods [1].

Feature extraction approaches are dominated by methods estimating the signal‘s energy distributed in the frequency, time-frequency (t-f) and time-scale (t-s) domains [3]. Time-frequency (t-s) approaches analyze and compare the fundamental frequencies and the harmonic frequencies of normal and epileptic events for epilepsy detection. These types of analyses include short-time Fourier transforms and wavelet transforms .In frequency domain, power spectrum methods that obtain Power Spectrum Density (PSD) as a useful feature of EEG signal has been proposed [4], [5], [6]. Research on using Walelet analysis as a feature extraction method for EEG signals has also been reported [7], [8]. Also, a few statistical signal processing techniques like Independent Component Analysis (ICA) have also been proposed [10]. Several linear as well as ———————————————— non- linear approaches have been developed for classifi G. Garg is a Teaching cum Research Scholar with the Department of Incation [9], [10]. Linear discriminant analysis (LDA) [11] , strumentation & Control, Netaji Subhas Institute of Technology, Universi- regularised Fischer discriminant(RFD) and support vector ty of Delhi, New Delhi, India. machines(SVM) [12], [13] with linear and non linear ker S. Behl is a student with the Department of Instrumentation & Control, Netaji Subhas Institute of Technology, University of Delhi, New Delhi, In- nels are usually employed as classifiers. Neural networks dia. [14], [15] and adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference systems  Dr. V. Singh is an Associate Professor with the Department of Instrumen- have also been utilized for classification of normal and tation & Control, Netaji Subhas Institute of Technology, University of epileptic EEG because of their self-training capability. Delhi, New Delhi, India.

JOURNAL OF COMPUTING, VOLUME 3, ISSUE 5, MAY 2011, ISSN 2151-9617 HTTPS://SITES.GOOGLE.COM/SITE/JOURNALOFCOMPUTING/ WWW.JOURNALOFCOMPUTING.ORG

161

A past research reveals that PSD approaches are the most robust and consistent in extracting epilepsy related EEG spectral content. However, most comparative analyses reported in the literature have been confined to a limited, small set of methods for PSD estimation [3]. Whereas, a large array of algorithms are available for determining PSD of a signal wiz. Non-Parametric methods (Welch, Periodogram algorithms) and Parametric methods (Burg, Yule-Walker , Covariance algorithms).Therefore, the motivation of this study is to present a more detailed and systematic study & analysis of the available power spectrum estimation methods for epilepsy detection. This evaluation is then used to suggest a robust and accurate spectral analysis method that together with an MDBC classifier can constitute a reliable, practical epilepsy detection method, balancing computational complexity and detection accuracy. The combination of Welch PSD estimation method and Mahalanobis distance based classifier on an EEG that can perform robust and accurate evaluation on the collected data is proposed.

ation are used to suggest a robust method for achieving a reliable epilepsy detection method. For obtaining PSD, Non-Parametric methods (Welch, Periodogram algorithms) and parametric methods (Burg, Yule-Walker, and Covariance algorithms) are used. The Mahalanobis Discriminant Analysis technique is used as a method of classification of the normal and epileptic EEG based on their PSD estimates.

2.2 EEG DataSet Acquisition
EEG Data described in Andrzejak et al. (2001) [16], which is publicly available has been utilized in this work. The complete dataset consists of five sets (denoted A–E), each containing 100 single-channel EEG signals of 23.6 s. Each signal has been selected after visual inspection for artefacts and has passed a weak stationarity criterion. Sets A and B have been taken from surface EEG recordings of five healthy volunteers with eyes open and closed, respectively. Signals in two sets have been measured in seizure-free intervals from five patients in the epileptogenic zone (D) and from the hippocampal formation of the opposite hemisphere of the brain (C). Set E contains seizure activity, selected from all recording sites exhibiting ictal activity. Sets A and B have been recorded extracranially, whereas sets C, D, and E have been recorded intracranially. For this study, only datasets A and E have been utilized.The first dataset (A) contains the EEG signals of a normal, healthy person while the second dataset (E) comprises the EEG signal values of an epileptic person.

2 THEORY
2.1 Background A typical EEG Signal Study and Analysis model has three sub-blocks:
 EEG data acquisition: to aquire the EEG data from a particular condition Feature extraction: to extract the suitable information/features from the EEG signals Classifier: for classification of signals into different classes based on extracted features

Figure 1 shows a block diagram representation of the EEG analysis model employed in our study.

2.3 Feature Extraction Feature extraction is a process focused on discovering a pattern that can differentiate between various classes. This feature represents the signal information which is used as the basis of classification of the signals into distinct types.It is a significant module as the selection of the feature and the method used to extract that feature largely determine the classification accuracy.In this study, the PSD is used as the signal feature since PSD is a good indicator of signal information, simple and quick to calculate and very robust.There are numerous methods available to determine the power level of PSD for a given signal.The various methods of spectral estimation used are categorized as follows:
  Nonparametric methods Parametric methods

Fig. 1. A Block Diagram Representation of a general Epilepsy Detection System

In this study, the PSD of the EEG signals has been used for extraction of information/features for classification of normal and epileptic datasets. The power spectral density represents the power content of a signal in an infinitesimal frequency band. Several methods are available for estimation of PSD. In this research we evaluate the performance of the various PSD estimation techniques for feature extraction. The results of the evalu-

2.3.1 Non Parametric PSD Estimation Methods Nonparametric methods estimate the PSD directly from the signal itself. Examples are the Welch method and Periodogram method.

JOURNAL OF COMPUTING, VOLUME 3, ISSUE 5, MAY 2011, ISSN 2151-9617 HTTPS://SITES.GOOGLE.COM/SITE/JOURNALOFCOMPUTING/ WWW.JOURNALOFCOMPUTING.ORG

162

PERIODOGRAM METHOD In this method , Power level of the PSD of a signal is estimated by taking the discrete-time Fourier transform of the samples of the process (usually done on a grid with an FFT) and then taking the magnitude squared of the result. Our implementation uses the FFT and computes the N-point PSD estimate to be : , Where ( ) is the signal of length L. The periodogram can be a useful tool for spectral estimation only in situations where the SNR is high and the data record is very long. WELCH METHOD This method, proposed by Welch is an improved estimator of PSD over the periodogram method. The method consists of dividing the time series data into (possibly overlapping) segments, computing a modified periodogram of each segment, and then averaging the PSD estimates. The result is Welch's PSD estimate. The expected PSD is found to be: E{ (1) , ( )

(3)

YULE-WALKER METHOD The Yule-Walker AR method of spectral estimation computes the AR parameters by forming a biased estimate of the signal's autocorrelation function, and solving the least squares minimization of the forward prediction error. This results in the Yule-Walker equations.

(4) BURG METHOD The Burg method for AR spectral estimation is based on minimizing the forward and backward prediction errors while satisfying the Levinson-Durbin recursion. The primary advantages of the Burg method are resolving closely spaced sinusoids in signals with low noise levels, and estimating short data records, in which case the AR power spectral density estimates are very close to the true values. In addition, the Burg method ensures a stable AR model and is computationally efficient. COVARIANCE AND MODIFIED COVARIANCE METHODS The covariance method for AR spectral estimation is based on minimizing the forward prediction error. The modified covariance method is based on minimizing the forward and backward prediction errors.

Where Ls is the length of the data segments and U is the normalization constant (2) This is independent of the choice of window. The addition of U as a normalization constant ensures that the Welch plot is asymptotically unbiased. The PSD produced by Welch's method has wider peaks and is a better estimator of PSD compared to periodogram method.

2.3.2 Parametric Methods for PSD Estimation In Parametric methods PSD is obtained by first estimating the parameters (AR model coefficients) of the linear system that hypothetically "generates" the signal. PSD is then the output of this linear system driven by white noise. The linear system model used is the all-pole model, a filter with all of its zeroes at the origin in the z-plane. The output of such a filter for white noise input is an autoregressive (AR) process.
The AR methods tend to adequately describe spectra of data that is "peaky," that is, data whose PSD is large at certain frequencies. These methods yield a PSD estimate given by:

2.4 Classification For classification of EEG signals into epileptic or normal, Linear Discriminant Analysis (LDA) is a widely used classifier. It is a linear method based on the mean and covariance of the data only. Thus, only second order statistics is used in LDA, higher order statistics and nonlinearity are not considered. It requires fewer samples in training set in order to obtain a reliable classification. Moreover, LDA is able to produce an output which is continuous in time as well as in amplitude.
However, sometimes the LDA output seems to be biased towards one class. The different variability for each class causes this bias in the LDA output Hence, to obtain more accurate classification another linear method called Mahalanobis Distance based Classifier (MDBC) was employed. The main difference between LDA and MDBC is that in case of LDA the Variance-covariance of the whole data is used, whereas in case of MDBC the different covariancematrices are considered for each class. Therefore, MDBC

JOURNAL OF COMPUTING, VOLUME 3, ISSUE 5, MAY 2011, ISSN 2151-9617 HTTPS://SITES.GOOGLE.COM/SITE/JOURNALOFCOMPUTING/ WWW.JOURNALOFCOMPUTING.ORG

163

takes into account the different variance-covariance of each class. Therefore it is a superior classifier over LDA. Suppose there are n data elements in the training set and each element has say m features. Each element belongs assigned to one of the two classes c= {0,5}. Then, S is a matrix of size n x m, and C is a vector of size n. N0 and N1 are the number of elements for class 0 and 1, respectively. uc, the mean of all the elements belonging to the class c is calculated for each class. From these means, the Covariance matrix, Cc of the training set is obtained. Now, the mean μc and the covariance Cc determine the multivariate normal probability density function (pdf) that corresponds to class c. Now, any point in the mdimensional feature space (input test element) can be associated with a certain distance to each class 0 and 5. The difference of these distances is the decision parameter, D. If D>0, the test signal belongs to class 0 , otherwise it belongs to class 5. This explains the working of the MDBC classifier.

event wrongly, it was considered a failure. Or analysis of results, Accuracy, specificity and selectivity of classification was calculated. Occurrence of epilepsy is a positive event while a normal EEG was a negative event. An event detected correctly was considered positive and event detected false was considered a negative event. Based on these assumptions, Accuracy (A), Selectivity (SE) and Specificity (SP) are given by:

Selectivity = Specificity = Accuracy =

(7) (8)
(9)

3 METHODOLOGY USED
Feature selection is significant component of designing an epilepsy detection method based on pattern classification as a classifier will perform poorly if the input features are not selected well. The power levels of the PSDs of the EEG signals of each record were used as the features representing these signals. In the first step each method was carried out to obtain their respective PSD estimation. As each method computes the power levels using different methodology, the extracted feature content for all these method vary. In order to reduce the dimensionality of the extracted features, statistics over these power levels was used. The statistical measures used further for classification were: 1. Maximum power level of the PSD among those of each signal segment. 2. Maximum power level of the PSD among those of each signal segment. 3. Mean of the power levels of the PSDs in each signal segment. 4. Standard Deviation of the power levels of the PSDs in each signal segment. Thus, a feature vector of 1x4 dimensions for each data record was obtained. A part of these feature vectors comprised the training set for the MDBC classifier form which it learned and classified the data into two classes— normal and epileptic. The whole of the data set then comprised the test group on which classification was performed and each record was classified in one of the two groups. Every epileptic record classified in the epileptic class and normal record classified in normal class by the classifier was a success event. If classifier classified any

where TP is the true positive, the total number of correctly detected positive events; TN is the true negative, the total number of correctly detected negative events; FP is the false positive, the total number of erroneously positive detections (i.e., false alarms); and FN is the false negative, the total number of erroneously negative detections (i.e., missed detections) [4].

4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
The results are derived from two analysis tests conducted, which are:  Graphical plots of the PSD of the EEG signal given by each method Accuracy, Specificity and Selectivity of classification by MDBC classifier obtained from each Power spectrum estimation technique employed as a feature extraction method.

The PSD plots obtained by using each of the five methods used in this study are shown in Fig. 5(a)-(e) in the Appendix A. From Fig. 5(a) , showing the graph of the PSD estimated by Periodogram method at different frequencies, it is evident that it is not a suitable feature extraction method as the power level estimates obtained are not accurate. This can be attributed to the fact the periodogram method is the most elementary method that simply finds the discrete-time Fourier transform of the samples of the process (usually done on a grid with an FFT) and takes the magnitude squared of the result as a measure of PSD. It is a biased estimator of the PSD as the variance does not tend to zero as the data length L tends to infinity. This leads to a leaky spectral plot as is visible in Fig. 5(a) Thus, in statistical terms; the periodogram is not a consistent estimator of the PSD even for large data records. In contrast, from Fig. 5(b) it is seen that the PSD plot obtained from Welch's method has wider peaks and no spectral leakage. This can be attributed to the fact that Welch method is an improved version of the periodo-

JOURNAL OF COMPUTING, VOLUME 3, ISSUE 5, MAY 2011, ISSN 2151-9617 HTTPS://SITES.GOOGLE.COM/SITE/JOURNALOFCOMPUTING/ WWW.JOURNALOFCOMPUTING.ORG

164

gram which can perform satisfactorily for large data records. The Welch method consists of dividing the time series data into (possibly overlapping) segments, computing a modified periodogram of each segment, and then averaging the PSD estimates. The averaging of modified periodograms tends to decrease the variance of the PSD estimate in comparison to the variance of the PSD estimate given by Periodogram method. Hence for a large data record like the EEG signal record used in this study, Welch method yields acceptable results. Fig. 5(c)-(e) show the PSD estimates of EEG signal using the parametric methods- Burg, Yule walker and Covariance methods respectively. Compared to nonparametric methods, these methods usually produce better results because parametric methods are based on AR modelling. They model the data as the output of a linear system driven by white noise. The AR methods tend to adequately describe spectra of data that is peaky, that is, data whose PSD is large at certain frequencies. From the PSD plots, it is seen that they yield smoother curves. The accuracy of parametric methods depends on determining the order of the AR model correctly. From analysis, the AR order for the system implemented in this study was found to be 6. Table. 1 gives a tabular compilation of the accuracy, selectivity and specificity of classification into epileptic and normal data set as given by each of the methods when used as a feature extraction technique along with an MDBC classifier.
TABLE 1: Accuracy, Sensitivity and Specificity of the various PSD estimation methods Method
Classification Accuracy (%)

ing a non-parametric method, Welch method is able to yield higher accuracy as the EEG data record used for the study is long and peaky. As shown in Table. 1, all parametric methods yield high accuracy (91-93 %) as they effectively model the system as an auto-regressive process to estimate the power level of PSD of the EEG signals.Depending on the purpose and application of the epilepsy detection system, a suitable parametric method among the three methods(Yule-Walker, Burg and Covariance) can be selected .Another benefit of using parametric methods is that these methods do not lead to a leaky spectral estimation and show wider peaks in the PSD plot. For these reasons, the parametric methods for PSD estimation of EEG signals can be considered as most suitable feature extraction technique for an epilepsy detection system.

Selectivity in (%)
100
Selectivity(%)

80 60 40 20 0 Welch Covariance Periodogram YuleWalker Burg Burg

Feature extraction method used

Fig. 2. Graph indicating selectivity versus the feature extraction method used with MDBC classifier for epilepsy diagnosis

Classification Accuracy in (%)
100 90 80 70 60 50
Welch Covariance Periodogram Yule-walker Accuracy (%)

Selectivity (%) 61.11 87.77 86.66 85.55 83.33

Specificity (%) 100 100 100 100 100

PERIODOGRAM WELCH COVARIANCE YULEWALKER BURG

75.00 93.88 93.33 92.27 91.66

Feature extraction method used

For better visual comparison, these results are also plotted as graphs. Fig. 2 shows selectivity vs. the feature extraction method used. Fig. 3 is a graph of classification accuracy as obtained experimentally from each spectral estimation method. Fig. 4 shows Classification accuracy vs. the feature extraction method used. Among Nonparametric methods, periodogram is not a reliable technique as it yields poor accuracy of 75% as revealed in the Table. 1. In contrast, Welch method is a suitable non parametric method for EEG feature extraction as it gives a good estimation of PSD (accuracy=93.33 %). Despite be-

Fig. 3. Graph indicating classification accuracy versus the feature extraction method used with MDBC classifier for epilepsy diagnosis

5 CONCLUSION
The performance of any classifier and that of an epilepsy detection system depends largely on the degree of accuracy of extracting signal information from the signals to be classified. Therefore, feature extraction and selection plays a determining role in any epilepsy detection method. In the present study, the feature on which classification was performed was chosen as the PSD content of the signal and the signals were classified using the Linear

JOURNAL OF COMPUTING, VOLUME 3, ISSUE 5, MAY 2011, ISSN 2151-9617 HTTPS://SITES.GOOGLE.COM/SITE/JOURNALOFCOMPUTING/ WWW.JOURNALOFCOMPUTING.ORG

165
Power Spectral Density Estimate via Welch
50

‗Mahalanobis distance based Classifier‘. Through this study, many PSD estimation methods (namely Periodogram, Welch, Covariance, Burg and Yule walker) were

40

Power/frequency (dB/Hz)

Specificity in (%)
90 100

30

20

Specificity(%)

80

10

60

70

0

50

Welch

Periodogram

Yule-Walker

Covariance

Burg

-10

0

0.02

0.04

0.06 0.08 Frequency (kHz)

0.1

0.12

Feature extraction method used

Fig.5(b). PSD plot of an EEG Signal utilized in the study using Welch method
Power Spectral Density Estimate via Burg
70

Fig. 4. Graph indicating specificity obtained versus the feature extraction method used with MDBC classifier for epilepsy diagnosis

60

Power/frequency (dB/rad/sample)

explored to suggest the most accurate and robust method among them for feature extraction .The research demonstrated that Parametric methods are superior to traditional non-parametric methods for PSD estimation and henceforth for feature extraction.

50

40

30

6

APPENDIX A

20

In this section the PSD plots obtained by using each of the five methods used in this study are shown in Fig. 5(a)(e).
Power Spectral Density Estimate via Periodogram
80

10

0

0

0.1

0.2

0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 Normalized Frequency ( rad/sample)

0.8

0.9

1

Fig.5(c). PSD plot of an EEG Signal utilized in the study using Burg method
Power Spectral Density Estimate via Yule-Walker
70

60 60

Power/frequency (dB/rad/sample)

Power/frequency (dB/rad/sample)
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 Normalized Frequency ( rad/sample) 0.8 0.9 1

40

50

20

40

0

30

20

-20 10 -40

0

0

0.1

0.2

Fig.5(a). PSD plot of an EEG Signal utilized in the study using Periodogram method

0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 Normalized Frequency ( rad/sample)

0.8

0.9

1

Fig. 5(d). PSD plot of an EEG Signal utilized in the study using YuleWalker method

JOURNAL OF COMPUTING, VOLUME 3, ISSUE 5, MAY 2011, ISSN 2151-9617 HTTPS://SITES.GOOGLE.COM/SITE/JOURNALOFCOMPUTING/ WWW.JOURNALOFCOMPUTING.ORG
Power Spectral Density Estimate via Covariance
70

166

60

[14]

50

40

[15]
30

20

[16]
10

0

0

0.1

0.2

0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 Normalized Frequency ( rad/sample)

0.8

0.9

1

[17]

Fig.5(e). PSD plot of an EEG Signal utilized in the study using Covariance method

zure prediction from intracranial EEG,‖ in Proc. IEEE Workshop Mach. Learn. Signal Process.(MLSP 2008), Cancun, Mexico, Oct. 16–19, pp. 244–249. A. T. Tzallas, M. G. Tsipouras, and D. I. Fotiadis, ―Automatic seizure detection based on time-frequency analysis and artificial neural networks,‖ Computational Intelligence and Neuroscience, vol. 2007, Article ID 80510, 13 pages, 2007. Petrosian, D. Prokhorov, R. Homan, R. Dascheiff, and D. Wunsch,II, ―Recurrent neural network based prediction of epileptic seizures in intra- and extracranial EEG,‖ Neurocomputing, vol. 30, no. 1–4, pp. 201– 218, 2000 R. G. Andrzejak, K. Lehnertz and C. Rieke, ―Indications of non linear deterministic and finite dimensional structures in time series of brain electrical activity : Dependence on recording region and brain state,‖ Phys.Rev.E, vol. 64 , 2001 A. T. Tzallas, M. G. Tsipouras, and D. I. Fotiadis, ―Epileptic seizure detection in EEGs using time-frequency analysis,‖ IEEE Transactions on Information Technology in Biomedicine, vol. 13, no. 5, pp. 703–710, 2009.

REFERENCES
[1] N. Kwak and C.H. Choi, ―Input feature selection for classification problems,‖ IEEE transactions on Neural Networks, vol. 13, no. 1,pp. 143159, 2002 Elif Derya Ubeyli, Dean Cvetkovic and Irena Cosic, ―Eigen Vector Methods for analysis of Human PPG, ECG andEEG Signals,‖ Proceedings of the 29th Annual International Conference of the IEEE EMBS, 2007 Pawel Hermen, Girijesh Prasad, Thomas McGinnity and Damien Coyle, ―Comparative Analysis of Spectral Approaches to Feature Extraction for EEG-Based Motor Imagery Classification,‖ IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering, vol. 16, No.4, August 2008. Sheng-Fu Liang, Hsu-ChuanWang and Wan-Lin Chang, ―Combination of EEG Complexity and Spectral Analysis for Epilepsy Diagnosis and Seizure Detection,‖ EURASIP Journal on Advances in Signal Processing ,vol. 2010 , Article ID 853434, 15 pages, 2010 S. R. Mousavi, M. Niknazar, and B. V. Vahdat, ―Epileptic seizure detection using AR model on EEG signals,‖ in Proceedings of Cairo International Biomedical Engineering Conference (CIBEC ’08), pp. 1–4, Cairo, Egypt, December 2008. B.-C. Kuo and D. A. Landgrebe, ―Nonparametric weighted feature extraction for classification,‖ IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, vol. 42, no. 5, pp. 1096–1105, 2004. A. Subasi, ―Epileptic seizure detection using dynamic wavelet network,‖ Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 343–355, 2005. A. Subasi, ―EEG signal classification using wavelet feature extraction and a mixture of expertmodel,‖ Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 1084–1093, 2007. P. McSharry, L. Smith, and L. Tarassenko, ―Comparison of predictabili ty of epileptic seizures by a linear and a nonlinear method,‖ IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng., vol. 50, pp. 628–633, May 2003. A. Subast and M. I . Gursoy, ―A Comparison of PCA,ICA and LDA in EEG Signal Classification using SVM,‖ IEEE 16th Signal Processing, Communication snd Applications Conference, pp. 1- 4, 2008. Dr. Alois Schlögl, ―A new linear classification method for an EEGbased Brain-Computer Interface,‖ Technical Report I. G¨uler and E. D. ¨ Ubeyli, ―Multiclass support vector machines for EEG-signals classification,‖ IEEE Transactions on Information Technology in Biomedicine, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 117–126, 2007. P.W. Mirowski, Y. LeCun, D. Madhavan, and R. Kuzniecky, ―Comparing SVM and convolutional networks for epileptic sei-

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7] [8]

[9]

[10]

[11] [12]

[13]

Power/frequency (dB/rad/sample)