Neural Computing and Applications (2021) 33:4579–4593

https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-021-05779-0 (0123456789().,-volV)(0123456789().
,- volV)

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

EEG-Based classification of branded and unbranded stimuli associating

with smartphone products: comparison of several machine learning
algorithms
Abdurrahman Özbeyaz1

Received: 2 October 2019 / Accepted: 28 January 2021 / Published online: 17 February 2021
Ó The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag London Ltd. part of Springer Nature 2021

Abstract
Neurocomputing studies on consumer attitudes have recently made a significant contribution to branding psychology. This
study investigates consumer decisions for a branded stimulus using advanced machine learning algorithms. Electroen-
cephalogram (EEG) signals were recorded during experiments in which ten branded and ten unbranded smartphones were
shown to the subjects as stimuli. Then, EEG signals were classified using a methodological approximation consisting of
four stages: pre-processing, feature extraction, channel selection, and classification. This is the first time a four-stage
methodology has been applied in a neuromarketing study. The analysis study employed autoregressive (AR), principal
component analysis (PCA), and piecewise constant modeling (PCM) in the feature extraction stage; artificial bee colony
(ABC) and independent component analysis (ICA) in the channel selection stage; and artificial neural network (ANN) and
support vector machine (SVM) in the classification stage. By comparing the successes of the methods in each stage, the
methodological combination that gives the best classification performance was determined. According to the results, 72%
accuracy was obtained in the average classification and an 85% accuracy on an individual basis. In the classification that
achieved the best success, PCA in feature extraction, ABC in channel selection, and ANN in classification were used. In
addition, the AF3-F7 (frontal brain regions) channels were observed to be the best-decomposed channel pair for different
classes. The results also showed that stimulation within the brain for a branded product occurred at about 200 ms after the
stimulus onset.

Keywords Electroencephalogram  Classification of branded stimuli  Channel selection  Feature extraction

1 Introduction someone who is about to buy a branded product behaves

A brand is a marketing concept that shapes the relationship
between businesses and consumers. Researchers have
claimed that the purchasing process shows a positive
impact on the brand [1, 2]. Today’s consumers purchase
brands rather than products due to the different meanings
that businesses place within their brands. There have been
many marketing studies performed on how the brain of
& Abdurrahman Özbeyaz
aozbeyaz@adiyaman.edu.tr
1
Department of Electrical Electronics Engineering,
Engineering Faculty, Adıyaman University, Adıyaman,
Turkey
[3].
Research in the field of neuroscience has recently been
extended to consumer psychology and brand awareness
practice [4]. The primary purpose of neuroscience studies
analyzing consumer psychology is to measure consumer
decisions and to provide an understanding of these
behaviors by combining experimental processes with neu-
roscience methods. Therefore, modeling consumer behav-
iors and establishing a robust neuropsychological basis in
the researched topic become easier over time as more
information is gathered [5]. The studies examining neuro-
science and consumer decision together are largely focused
under neuromarketing science and on the analysis of
electroencephalogram (EEG) signals recorded from the
human brain. EEG technology provides information about
how the human brain makes decisions [6].

123
4580
Neurocomputing studies using EEG technology have gen-
erally focused on diagnosing specific diseases in clinical
environments. However, these types of studies also have
recently been extended to other disciplines, like neuro-
marketing, that deals with the human cognition system [4].
Currently, extensive neuromarketing research is being
conducted to try to understand customer purchasing
behaviors using EEG [4].
Very few studies in the literature have focused on
classifying EEG signals against branded and unbranded
product stimuli. Furthermore, previous studies have shown
that employing a four-stage methodology in the classifi-
cation process can significantly increase the performance
of the learning algorithm (both accuracy and computation
time), because of reducing data size [7–10]. Therefore, this
neuromarketing study in which branded products are
classified is amplified by a four-stage analysis. In a similar
study, various car brands were shown to subjects in an EEG
experiment. The subjects were asked to complete a ques-
tionnaire after each session related to whether they liked
the contents presented in the session. The recorded EEG
signals were successfully classified by using an ANN
algorithm in the study [11]. However, no channel selection
method was applied in their research. In another study,
mobile phone and tablet images with six different brands
were shown as stimuli to the participants during the EEG
recording. The EEG signals were classified successfully
using SVM and ANN methods. However, no applications
involving selecting the brain regions were developed, and
the analysis process was limited only to the pre-filtering
and feature extraction processes [12]. In another research
study, four experimental tasks were conducted to obtain
and analyze EEG signals against the branded stimuli. In the
EEG experiments, the subjects were asked whether they
liked or disliked the brands, and it was emphasized
throughout the study that the branded stimuli activated the
anterior region of the brain. However, no machine learning
algorithms were used [1].
This study proposes a novel EEG classification in which
advanced machine learning algorithms are used to bring a
new breath to the neuromarketing field. First, EEG exper-
iments were conducted between 11 subjects to perform a
branded/unbranded classification. The recorded EEG sig-
nals in the experimental process were classified with the
SVM and ANN algorithms, but, before the classification
process, the data were subjected to preprocess, feature
extraction, and channel selection stages. The autoregres-
sive (AR), principal component analysis (PCA), and
piecewise constant modeling (PCM) algorithms were used
in the feature extraction process. In addition, the indepen-
dent component analysis (ICA) and artificial bee colony
(ABC) algorithms were used in the channel selection pro-
cess. The combinations of these algorithms used in each
123
Neural Computing and Applications (2021) 33:4579–4593
stage were investigated to find the combination with the
best classification accuracy. These algorithms were used
because of their previous successes in EEG classification
studies [8, 10, 13–19]. The motivation behind the study is a
curiosity of the classification success of the brain activa-
tions for branded and unbranded stimuli.
The next sections of this paper are organized as follows.
The experimental materials and classification methods are
given in the second and third sections, respectively. The
classification performances associated with the method-
ological approximations, and the selected channels are
discussed in the fourth section, and the conclusion’s section
is presented in the fifth section.
2 Materials
2.1 Subjects
Eleven healthy volunteers participated in the EEG experi-
ments, seven of whom were female (64%) and 4 of whom
were male (36%). The ages of the subjects ranged from 19
to 22 years, with an average age of 20.7 and a standard
deviation of 0.9. All participants appeared to be healthy,
none wore glasses, and none had any reported physical,
psychological, or neurological issues. All subjects signed
the informed consent form before each session. The
experimental studies were approved by the local Ethics
Committee in the Health Sciences Institute at Adiyaman
University.
2.2 Stimuli
Twenty stimuli images of smartphone products, ten bran-
ded and ten unbranded, were used in the study. A prelim-
inary survey was conducted among approximately 300
subjects to decide which brands to use, resulting in Venus,
Huawei, Microsoft, LG, Nokia, Sony, Samsung, iPhone,
Motorola, and MI. The display order of the stimuli was
mixed randomly for each session. The stimuli images were
obtained from the smartphone manufacturers’ web pages
and were equalized in terms of luminance and contrast
using Adobe Photoshop 8. The presentation software was
developed with Microsoft.Net C#, and this software was
synchronized with the EEG acquisition system.
2.3 Experimental procedure
In the experiment, the subjects were seated on a comfort-
able armchair with an LCD-type monitor located at a dis-
tance of 60 cm from the subjects. The monitor was
controlled by a desktop computer. The presentation soft-
ware showed the subjects the stimuli images in a random
Neural Computing and Applications (2021) 33:4579–4593
order in each session, with the order being recorded in a
text file. Moreover, the stimuli were verified by the subjects
after each session through the software, so the signals were
labeled. During the experiment, the subjects decided which
smartphone they wanted to buy. The experiment procedure
is summarized as follows. At the beginning of the experi-
ment, the ‘‘Experiment Start’’ warning appeared for 30 s on
the screen. Then, the stimulus pictures were shown for
10 s, and this was followed by a white fixed screen that
appeared for 3 s to enable subjects to focus on the next
stimulus. The 10-s duration corresponding to the display
time of a stimulus is called one-trial. One-trial is an indi-
vidual decision response for a stimulus in an EEG exper-
iment. One epoch lasted 13 s, and one session lasted 4 min
and 50 s (10 ? 3 = 13 s; 30 ? 10 * 20 ? 3 *
20 = 290 s = 4 min and 50 s). In the study, the Emotiv
Epoch device [20] was used to acquire the EEG signals.
According to the International 10–20 system, EEG signals
were recorded over 14 channels (AF3, F7, F3, FC5, T7, P7,
O1, O2, P8, T8, FC6, F4, F8, and AF4). Notch filtering at
50 Hz was applied to the recorded EEG signals, which
were then digitized to a digital signal at a sampling rate of
128 Hz using a 14-bit analog-to-digital converter.
3 Methods
3.1 Pre-processing
The EEG data were controlled manually before the pre-
processing stage, and any corrupted data were removed
from the dataset. In this stage, a band-pass filter between
0.16 and 32 Hz was applied to signals for examining the
EEG signals at the normal limits, and 50-Hz notch filtering
was used to eliminate mains-borne noise from the signals.
The order of the band-pass filter was 10; the sampling
frequency of the EEG acquisition system was 128 Hz; the
filtering process eliminated the background noise, and
lastly the entire signal was subtracted from its mean. All
signals were scaled by their standard deviation for each
trial. The pre-processing stage was applied to all data in the
study.
3.2 Feature extraction
3.2.1 Autoregressive (AR)
The Autoregressive (AR) method is a model designed
employing the Burg Method and is used to perform a
spectral analysis of a signal. The parameters in the AR
model are commonly employed to determine the power
density function. Moreover, the optimal modeling of a data
series is possible with the lowest number of parameters in
4581
the AR method. In the spectrum estimation of the AR
method, the model degree determining the number of
parameters is found by the cutoff points of the auto-cor-
relation and partial auto-correlation functions. The classi-
cal equation of the AR complex process with non-fixed
content is given in Eq. 1 for the Burg method.
X
p
x ð nÞ ¼ c þ ai xðn  iÞ þ eðnÞ ð1Þ
i¼1
where ai ðnÞ indicates the parameters of the model,c is the
constant, p is the model order, eðnÞ represents the white
complex noise, and n is the sample number [21]. Since the
frequency spectrum of EEG signals has sudden peaks, AR
modeling is suitable for analyzing the signals. In this study,
the AR model was used in feature extraction, and the AR
coefficients were set to three for each trial. In the study,
four features associated with the AR model were trans-
ferred to the next stage as the normalized parameters in
each trial. In machine learning studies, the model order of
the AR model has been commonly chosen as 6 [22].
Therefore, in this study, the model order was studied from
1 to 6, and the order was decided as 3.
3.2.2 Principal component analysis (PCA)
Principal component analysis (PCA) is a well-known
dimension reduction technique [23]. In this method, an
optimum low-dimensional dataset is the representation of
an original dataset. PCA performs the reduction process by
calculating the variance of the dataset, with the covariance
of the sample matrix being calculated first. The eigenvector
and eigenvalue are then obtained from the covariance
matrix. An eigenvalue of zero indicates that the eigen-
vectors corresponding to that eigenvalue are linearly
dependent [24].
In other words, PCA is a method that finds the best low-
dimensional subspace of a dataset X ¼ ðx1 ; x2 ; . . .; xn Þ by
the principal directions. These directions are defined as
U ¼ ðu1 ; u2 ; . . .; ud Þ 2 R. The notation of d is a subspace
dimension and is commonly less than the input dataset. In
the new space, the projection matrix is defined as
V ¼ ðv1 ; v2 ; . . .; un Þ 2 R. The task of PCA is to find U and
V by minimizing Eq. 2 [25].
 X 
 
minX  U V ; U T U ¼ I and VV T ¼ I ð2Þ
In this study, the PCA method was employed in the
feature extraction stage. Twenty coefficients obtained from
the 1280 samples were used as a feature matrix.
123
4582
3.2.3 Piecewise constant modeling (PCM)
The piecewise constant modeling (PCM) algorithm is
based on the decomposing process in the time-domain of
an input signal. Some temporal features of the signals can
be obtained using the PCM. The PCM process is carried
out as follows. The signals are first decomposed into sta-
tionary sub-windows, and then the samples in each sub-
window are averaged. The mean values obtained from the
sub-windows indicate the quantitative values of a vector in
the final stage. The resulting vector obtained after the
operations mentioned above includes all features of the
input signal in the time-domain [8, 10]. According to the
PCM feature extraction method, the length of a sub-win-
dow is expressed as in Eq. 3 [10]. In the equation, the a-
value is the length of one segment, and the y-value is the
sequence in one window.
1XN 1
a¼ yt ð3Þ
N t¼0
In the scope of this study, PCM was employed in the
feature extraction stage. Twenty coefficients were obtained
as features in the application. The length of a window in
the application was 64.
3.3 Channel selection
3.3.1 Artificial bee colony algorithm (ABC)
The artificial bee colony (ABC) algorithm is based on
swarm logic where bees’ intelligent behavior is modeled to
solve optimization problems [26–28]. The optimization
problem related to the channel selection process can be
expressed as follows. Let EEG channels be stated as
C ¼ fc1 ; . . .:; ci g; i ¼ 1. . .14, and let the trials be given as
T ¼ ft1 ; . . .:; tk g; k ¼ 1. . .20. T refers to the signal
belonging to each stimuli image. The aim is to find the least
correlated channel pairs through trials by using the Pearson
  
correlation function (P ¼ Covariance Tj ðcx Þ; Tz cy =
 
Tj ðrcx ÞTz rcy ). In this function, x and y refer to distinct
channels, and j and z refer to a different trial dataset. If
   
min P Tj ðCx Þ; Tz Cy is provided, the problem is
solved.
In this study, two-channel pairs belonging to different
classes (branded and unbranded) that are the least corre-
lated with each other were selected using the ABC algo-
rithm. The implementation of the ABC algorithm in the
study was as follows. The colony size was initially set to
100. Since 14 channels were used in the study, the length of
each solution space was 14 in the colony. Each solution
took a random number between 1 and 14. The algorithm
was run five times iterative, and the colony was optimized
123
Neural Computing and Applications (2021) 33:4579–4593
at each loop to find the most uncorrelated channels. The
upper and lower limits in the ABC algorithm were 1 and
14, respectively. The parameter controlling whether the
food sources were consumed was 100. The Pearson cor-
relation method was employed as the objective function.
The channel pairs with the lowest correlation belonging to
binary classes were selected through this function in each
trial.
3.3.2 Independent component analysis (ICA)
Independent component analysis (ICA) is a method that
converts a multidimensional vector into statistically sepa-
rate components as much as possible. The variances and
rankings of the components obtained by ICA are not evi-
dent. The distribution of individual components has a non-
gauss distribution. In this method, the average of the
classes in the sample is calculated before the executing
process. Subsequently, a dataset with a mean of zero is
subtracted from the calculated average sample matrix. The
next step ensures that the components of the new matrix,
whose mean is zero, are provided to be independent and
their variances equal. Next, the process continues with the
ICA, which works with a floating-point algorithm that
allows the analysis to be performed more quickly [14, 17].
We can express the ICA model in the following equation.
An ICA is applied to the cocktail party problem. A math-
ematical model representing this problem is given in Eq. 4.
xi ðtÞ ¼ ai1 s1 ðtÞ þ ai2 s2 ðtÞ þ . . . þ aiN sN ðtÞ ð4Þ
This expression can be re-written as x ¼ As by dropping
the time function. In the last equation, ‘‘s’’ denotes the
original source signals, the constant ‘‘A’’ is the mixing
matrix, and ‘‘x’’ is the measured matrix. The primary
matrix inversion for resolving the mixing matrix (A) is
done using the independent components (s). This inversion
process is realized with the s ¼ A1 x equation by the ICA.
In this study, the channel selection process was applied
using the ICA in addition to the ABC. Since it would take a
lot of time to classify the multichannel EEG data, only four
channels were selected with the ICA.
3.4 Classification
There are many alternative classification algorithms in the
literature [22, 29, 30]. SVM and ANN algorithms are
prominent in terms of the data size, data complexity, and
data type features. Therefore, these algorithms were
employed in the classification.
Neural Computing and Applications (2021) 33:4579–4593 4583

3.4.1 Artificial neural network (ANN) the steepest descent direction. This function is mathemat-
ically expressed in Eq. 7.
An artificial neural network (ANN) is a machine learning  
method where the anatomy and physiology of the biologic sðcÞ ¼ H wðcÞ vðcÞ
   
nervous system are simulated in a computer environment. rj wðcÞ þ evðcÞ  rj wðcÞ
¼ ; 0\e  1 ð7Þ
In this method, learning is a process that it is done e
according to a certain number of iterations. In addition, the
weights and biases of the structures connecting the nodes
3.4.2 Support vector machine (SVM)
of the ANN are updated according to a continuous error
function [31]. A feedforward pattern recognition network
The support vector machine (SVM) algorithm searches an
was designed to classify EEG signals in the study. Figure 1
optimal hyperplane that can separate the data into multi-
shows the structure of the ANN used in the study.
classes. This hyperplane maximizes the margin, which
In the ANN structure, there were 80 features in the input
creates boundaries for the positive and negative classes.
layer, 20 nodes in a hidden layer, and the output number
For inseparable instances, the objective is the same. The
were 1. The maximum number of epochs to train was 1000;
algorithm imposes a penalty on the length of the margin for
minimum performance gradient was 1e-6; the most number
every observation that is on the wrong side of its class
of validation failures was 6; sigma value was 5e-5, and
boundary [29, 34]. A mathematical expression belonging to
lambda value was 5e-7. In the designed classification
the SVM is given in Eq. 8.
structure, 70% of the data was used for training, 15% for
the test, and the last 15% for validation. Equation 5 cal-  X
l
w2 ¼ C ei ; yi ðw:xi [ þ bÞ  1  ei ð8Þ
culated the NET function during the feedforward process. 2
i¼1
In this equation, wk is the weight related to the kth neuron,
and ok is the output of that neuron [32]. The obtained NET According to Eq. 8, the size of the misclassified
values were used in the input of an activation function to instances should be minimized. The parameter C in the
calculate the network output. equation refers to the size of the misclassified samples in
Xn the training data. The lower the value of C is, the more
NET ¼ w k ok ð5Þ successful the model will be. This hyperplane minimization
k¼1 problem can be solved by the decision function given in
In the network, the tangent sigmoid function was used as Eq. 9 [22].
!
the activation function, which calculated a layer’s output Xl

from its NET input. Additionally, the neural network per- f ð xÞ ¼ sign ai yi \x; xi þ b

ð9Þ
i¼1
formance was calculated from the cross-entropy loss
function. The performance function is given in Eq. 6. In Because the dataset was in a nonlinear format, the data
this equation, x is the network response, t is the target were mapped into a multidimensional space using a linear
value, and N is the total number of observations.   0

X kernel function (G xj ; xk ¼ xj xk ). For this process, an

ce ¼ t logð xÞ; p ¼ ðceÞ=N ð6Þ
In the ANN, a scaled conjugate gradient backpropaga-
tion algorithm [33] was employed to train the network.
This algorithm updated the weights in the layers. This
function is a training function that adjusts the weights in
iterative single data algorithm via quadratic programming
was used. In the study, the predictors were made insensi-
tive to the scales on which they were measured. Addi-
tionally, the algorithm selected an appropriate scale factor
using a heuristic procedure. In the SVM algorithm, some
parameters were adjusted, as in the following. The number
of observations, excluding missing observations, was 15.

Fig. 1 Visual depiction of the

neural network structure

123
4584
The kernel-offset value was zero for each element of the
gram matrix. Two-class learning was used, and therefore,
the labels were 0 and 1 in the algorithm, and the bias term
was 0.4146. The boundaries of support vectors needed to
be adjusted with a box-constraints value during training,
which is why the box constraint value was set to 1 during
the classification. The sequential-minimal-optimization
(SMO) method was employed to restrict the working set.
3.5 Data
The raw data were arranged as a three-dimensional dataset
for each subject before the analysis process. Accordingly,
one subject was tested as a 3D dataset. In the 3D dataset,
the samples were found in the first dimension; the channels
were in the second dimension, and the trials were in the
third dimension. The 3D dataset was composed of the
signals obtained from 14 different channels placed in the
skull. The samples were only the signals recorded for a
stimulus time period (10 s * 128 Hz = 1280 samples). The
trials represented the binary class (ten branded and ten
unbranded stimuli) in the matrix. The structure of the 3D
dataset is shown in Fig. 2.
The classifier was run 20 times using a random split of
the data into training and testing for each subject sepa-
rately. The average of the 20 runs gave the classification
performance for one subject. In each run, three-quarters
and one-quarter of the data were randomly split into the
training and the testing subsets, respectively. The signal
and channel dimensions were reduced to 20 samples (three
for the AR method) and four channels in the feature
extraction and channel selection stages, respectively. The
data of the selected four channels were concatenated before
the classification process, and the dimension of the data
was adjusted to 80 by 20. Therefore, the size of the attri-
butes was 80, and the size of the observations (i.e.,
instance) was 20 (because of trial size).
Fig. 2 Structure of 3D dataset
123
Neural Computing and Applications (2021) 33:4579–4593
4 Findings and discussions
4.1 Classification results
The study aimed to classify the EEG signals acquired
against the branded and unbranded stimuli successfully. To
conduct an accurate classification process, the EEG signals
were analyzed in four stages: pre-processing, feature
extraction, channel selection, and classification. In the
analysis process, PCM, PCA, and AR were employed as
feature extraction methods. ABC and ICA were used as
channel selection methods, and ANN and SVM were used
as classification algorithms. The classification results were
obtained by sequentially applying the methods used in each
stage. Considering the combinations of the methods used in
each stage, a total of 12 different classification results were
obtained. The obtained results were compared in terms of
their classification successes, and the results are given in
the following sections. The classification results are
examined in terms of the methods used in the classification
and channel selection processes. The methodological
combinations are shown in Fig. 3.
Figure 3 shows the data dimensions in each stage,
visually showing that the sample size and the number of
channels were reduced after the feature extraction and the
channel selection processes. Because 20 or 3 features were
obtained according to the feature extraction method, these
values are represented as 20/3 in the figure. The sampling
frequency of the EEG device was 128 Hz. The total display
duration of stimuli in the experiment was 10 s. Therefore,
the signal length, including in the analysis process, was
1280 samples. Since the length of the signal is quite large,
the segment length was chosen as 64. EEG studies related
to visual stimuli that have been carried out in the literature
have commonly stated that the stimulus was started within
the first 500 ms [4]. Therefore, the length of the segment
chosen for 20 samples amounts to a time interval of 1/2 s
Neural Computing and Applications (2021) 33:4579–4593
Fig. 3 Classification scenario and data dimension states in four stages
(500 ms). Moreover, in some similar studies, feature-
length has also been employed between four and eight
samples [8, 10]. In the present study, the segment length
was decided empirically. In addition, the number of
channels included in the classification process was also
determined experimentally. Accordingly, the channels
were selected more than ten times, and ten were included in
the classification.
The branded and unbranded classification results are
given in the following tables. The classification successes
are shown as percentage values in the tables for different
combinations of algorithms used in the feature extraction,
channel selection, and classification stages and denote how
much the signals belonging to the branded class can be
separated from the unbranded. Table 1 provides the clas-
sification performances obtained when ANN and ICA were
used, and the results are presented as accuracy, specificity
(Qn), and sensitivity (Qd). Specificity (true-negative rate)
refers to the rate of the members labeled as real individuals,
although they are not in a cluster. Sensitivity (true-positive
rate) labels only those individuals who are sought in the
cluster correctly, but individuals not searched are not cru-
cial in this case. The average, standard deviation, and the
maximum and minimum values for each success are given
in the last four rows in Table 1. The results indicate that
PCM had the best average result, with about 68% classi-
fication success, and PCA had the finest individual
4585
classification success at about 85%. Furthermore, in this
method, Qn and Qm successes were higher, with about
100% and 76.5%, respectively. However, the worst per-
formance, about 40%, was observed in the application of
AR. The rate of deviation from the averages was satis-
factory in the PCA method, but it was not as good in the
AR method.
The results for the SVM and ICA methods are given in
Table 2. According to the results, PCA had an average
classification success of about 70%, but the AR method
achieved a better performance of about 85% on an indi-
vidual basis. The Qn and Qd values had the best perfor-
mances in the AR method, at about 85% and 86%,
respectively. This round was successful because there were
not any classification performances below 55%. Therefore,
the obtained successes were better than the previous anal-
ysis. Since the best standard deviation was 3.92 in PCA, it
was observed that this method had more stable results.
The classification results for the ANN and ABC meth-
ods are given in Table 3. According to Table 3, the average
classification results reached about 72% with PCA. Fur-
thermore, PCM accuracy reached about 84% on an indi-
vidual basis. Additionally, the average specificity (about
72%) and the average sensitivity (about 73%) values were
observed as the best in PCM. It was inferred from the
table that there were not any classification successes below
50%. The standard deviation had the best value at 3.79 in
123
4586 Neural Computing and Applications (2021) 33:4579–4593

Table 1 Classification results

AR PCA PCM
based on the ICA/ANN channel
selection/classification Subj. Acc. Spec. Sens. Acc. Spec. Sens. Acc. Spec. Sens.
combination
1 79.52 84.72 75.05 69.05 67.40 71.43 67.88 65.84 70.48
2 73.63 81.16 69.03 60.00 60.00 60.00 62.75 61.82 63.83
3 66.67 70.00 64.29 64.58 65.22 64.00 80.81 86.75 76.52
4 40.40 39.56 41.12 53.33 53.85 52.94 59.34 59.77 58.95
5 77.08 84.21 72.41 60.00 60.00 60.00 69.70 70.97 68.57
6 77.08 84.21 72.41 64.58 65.22 64.00 80.56 72.00 100.00
7 41.67 40.00 42.86 84.62 100.00 76.47 65.48 65.12 65.85
8 70.24 77.42 66.04 66.67 70.00 64.29 73.33 70.59 76.92
9 79.80 81.05 78.64 62.64 65.33 60.75 46.67 46.15 47.06
10 62.64 65.33 60.75 59.34 59.77 58.95 73.33 70.59 76.92
11 66.67 72.73 63.16 64.58 65.22 64.00 70.33 69.89 70.79
Avg. 66.85 70.94 64.16 64.49 66.55 63.35 68.20 67.23 70.54
Std. 13.30 15.86 11.63 7.54 11.41 6.00 9.30 9.45 12.58
Max. 79.80 84.72 78.64 84.62 100.00 76.47 80.81 86.75 100.00
Min. 40.40 39.56 41.12 53.33 53.85 52.94 46.67 46.15 47.06

Table 2 Classification results

AR PCA PCM
based on the ICA/SVM channel
selection/classification Subj. Acc. Spec. Sens. Acc. Spec. Sens. Acc. Spec. Sens.
combination
1 67.33 66.20 68.56 64.24 65.04 63.10 60.33 56.49 62.81
2 62.96 61.70 63.19 72.51 68.59 77.35 65.05 62.88 68.38
3 62.94 57.37 67.61 70.93 75.36 68.72 65.52 63.18 68.14
4 62.73 59.84 64.64 69.24 64.42 76.00 67.51 64.12 70.56
5 69.80 68.22 71.97 66.25 65.58 66.60 75.04 68.84 81.11
6 73.36 70.86 76.10 74.90 74.16 77.72 68.19 68.24 67.92
7 67.30 70.31 68.00 67.49 66.54 69.12 69.64 63.92 75.21
8 68.33 67.56 69.88 64.59 60.95 68.27 79.48 79.89 79.11
9 70.08 70.88 70.46 72.81 77.57 69.68 78.87 79.06 80.03
10 65.75 67.36 65.17 76.40 74.22 78.48 64.01 63.85 64.35
11 84.16 85.19 85.91 67.49 62.41 71.75 65.63 60.85 70.05
Avg. 68.61 67.77 70.14 69.71 68.62 71.53 69.02 66.48 71.61
Std. 5.86 7.00 6.06 3.92 5.47 4.90 5.92 6.88 6.03
Max. 84.16 85.19 85.91 76.40 77.57 78.48 79.48 79.89 81.11
Min. 62.73 57.37 63.19 64.24 60.95 63.10 60.33 56.49 62.81

PCA, which shows that the classification rates for all
subjects included in this round were not far from the
average.
The classification results for the SVM and the ABC are
given in Table 4. Table 4 shows that the PCM method
reached a classification rate of about 60%, on average. This
result is the best of this round, but it is the worst of all the
analysis processes. The maximum classification perfor-
mance was 72% on an individual basis, but specificity
reduced to nearly 20% while sensitivity remained at about
70%. The best standard deviation value was 3.71. The
results obtained on an individual basis showed a normal
distribution, as did the other rounds. The average and
standard deviation values of the accuracies, specificities,
and sensitivities are shown in Fig. 4.
When the twelve different results obtained from the
methodological combinations were compared, it was
observed that the best average classification accuracy was
obtained at about 72% in the PCA–ABC–ANN combina-
tion. However, the worst classification result on an average
basis was observed in the AR–ABC–SVM combination.
Moreover, the best individual classification accuracy was
obtained with 85% in the PCA–ICA–ANN combination.
The average successes obtained were lower than the

123
Neural Computing and Applications (2021) 33:4579–4593 4587

Table 3 Classification results

AR PCA PCM
based on the ABC/ANN
channel selection/classification Subj. Acc. Spec. Sens. Acc. Spec. Sens. Acc. Spec. Sens.
combination
1 73.33 74.64 74.36 71.81 74.68 70.71 58.29 54.17 63.39
2 59.84 60.40 58.96 81.42 83.51 82.20 66.46 68.70 64.18
3 64.82 63.25 67.05 70.38 72.12 71.04 75.77 73.07 79.11
4 68.30 67.49 70.30 67.20 67.98 67.60 68.51 70.00 68.67
5 66.11 61.52 70.70 70.84 69.32 72.56 84.05 83.68 85.78
6 71.81 70.24 73.88 68.79 65.66 72.31 60.62 67.90 55.68
7 59.20 54.45 62.47 69.82 70.41 71.47 66.17 65.64 67.75
8 63.58 63.17 65.96 76.24 77.54 76.20 79.15 82.38 77.01
9 58.88 62.80 55.18 73.18 74.29 74.77 72.74 70.04 75.83
10 61.21 63.83 60.66 69.28 71.98 66.82 60.05 55.42 64.24
11 70.92 72.96 70.32 72.09 68.06 76.02 63.19 65.12 62.45
Avg. 65.27 64.98 66.35 71.91 72.32 72.88 68.64 68.74 69.46
Std. 5.01 5.62 6.02 3.79 4.82 4.12 7.98 8.76 8.48
Max. 73.33 74.64 74.36 81.42 83.51 82.20 84.05 83.68 85.78
Min. 58.88 54.45 55.18 67.20 65.66 66.82 58.29 54.17 55.68

Table 4 Classification results

AR PCA PCM
based on the ABC/SVM
channel selection/classification Subj. Acc. Spec. Sens. Acc. Spec. Sens. Acc. Spec. Sens.
combination
1 57.00 42.50 66.67 59.00 25.00 81.67 52.00 5.00 83.33
2 58.00 22.50 81.67 69.00 45.00 85.00 56.00 22.50 78.33
3 55.00 25.00 75.00 66.00 25.00 93.33 55.00 0.00 91.67
4 50.00 37.50 58.33 58.00 15.00 86.67 55.00 30.00 71.67
5 58.00 42.50 68.33 58.00 20.00 83.33 70.00 50.00 83.33
6 64.00 65.00 63.33 58.00 15.00 86.67 56.00 5.00 90.00
7 40.00 45.00 36.67 56.00 15.00 83.33 56.00 22.50 78.33
8 52.00 60.00 46.67 60.00 20.00 86.67 72.00 45.00 90.00
9 66.00 45.00 80.00 58.00 7.50 91.67 61.00 20.00 88.33
10 51.00 47.50 53.33 61.00 22.50 86.67 49.00 0.00 81.67
11 67.00 62.50 70.00 59.00 35.00 75.00 52.00 0.00 86.67
Avg. 56.18 45.00 63.64 60.18 22.27 85.45 57.64 18.18 83.94
Std. 7.55 13.19 13.29 3.71 9.91 4.67 6.94 17.19 5.87
Max. 67.00 65.00 81.67 69.00 45.00 93.33 72.00 50.00 91.67
Min. 40.00 22.50 36.67 56.00 7.50 75.00 49.00 0.00 71.67

individual successes because the raw data for each subject
was not at the same clarity. When the results were com-
pared in terms of the channel selection process, it was
concluded that the ABC method was more successful than
ICA. Furthermore, the use of PCA as the feature extraction
method was effective in all processes. Although the ANN
method was found to be better on average, SVM was more
successful in some individual measurements.
The classification process was run 20 times for each
subject, and the average of the obtained results was
accepted as the classification success in the study. This
validation technique is known as Monte Carlo cross-
validation [35]. To confirm the successes for the best
classification process, the standard deviations and t test
analyses of the 20 classification results for each subject
were also obtained. These results are given in Table 5. It is
understood from the table that the 20 classification results
for each subject are seen to be consistent with each other.
The Wilcoxon rank-sum test is a nonparametric statis-
tical method that can be used to compare two populations.
In this method, if two different datasets are independent
samples with dissimilar sample sizes, the test statistic
returns the rank sum of the first sample. In this study, the
results obtained from ABC and from ICA were analyzed by

123
4588 Neural Computing and Applications (2021) 33:4579–4593

Fig. 4 Averages and standard deviations of the accuracies, specificities, and sensitivities obtained in all methodological combinations

Table 5 Standard deviation and

Std. Dev. Results t test Results
t test results for 20 runs with the
best classification. PCA, ABC, Subj. ACC Spec Sens ACC Spec. Sens.
and ANN methods were used
H p H p H p

1 0.16 0.20 0.17 1 1.14E-07 1 3.11E-05 1 4.55E-06

2 0.18 0.20 0.18 1 6.03E-05 1 9.39E-05 1 4.76E-04
3 0.16 0.27 0.19 1 2.18E-06 1 1.26E-06 1 4.52E-04
4 0.22 0.31 0.26 1 1.33E-06 1 6.10E-05 1 9.14E-05
5 0.18 0.26 0.25 1 2.22E-06 1 1.36E-05 1 1.13E-04
6 0.18 0.26 0.25 1 2.52E-06 1 1.68E-04 1 1.89E-04
7 0.21 0.25 0.23 1 3.40E-07 1 3.74E-05 1 5.92E-07
8 0.20 0.31 0.19 1 7.02E-07 1 2.36E-04 1 2.54E-04
9 0.19 0.33 0.27 1 1.61E-06 1 8.06E-05 1 4.37E-05
10 0.14 0.20 0.18 1 1.52E-05 1 5.58E-04 1 1.13E-04
11 0.19 0.23 0.18 1 2.06E-07 1 2.30E-05 1 2.49E-06
Avg. 0.18 0.26 0.21

the Wilcoxon statistical method. The dependencies test statistic more extreme than the observed value under
between the results obtained from ABC, and ICA were the null hypothesis. As a result, it was observed that the
examined in each methodological approximation. Table 6 dependencies between the results obtained from the chan-
shows the test results, with the p-values appearing as a nel selection methods (ABC and ICA) were rejected in
positive scalar from 0 to 1. P-value is the probability of a every methodological approach.
The branded/unbranded images displayed during the
experiment were shown in the second session again after
Table 6 Wilcoxon test between
Method (Accuracies) p-values each experiment. In this session, participants were asked
ABC and ICA channel selection
methods All Data 1.000
what their emotions were about buying each product shown
PCA-ANN 0.999
during the experiment. The given responses for branded
AR-ANN 0.916
and unbranded stimuli in the second session were analyzed,
and the number of responses for each stimulus is shown as
PCM-ANN 0.604
a histogram in Fig. 5. In the histogram, the even numbered
PCA-SVM 1.000
bars correspond to the frequency of responses for unbran-
AR-SVM 0.999
ded products. The figure shows that while the branded
PCAM-SVM 0.998
stimuli images were preferred 52 times, the unbranded

123
Neural Computing and Applications (2021) 33:4579–4593
Fig. 5 Given responses for branded and unbranded stimuli in the second session
stimuli images were preferred 47 times. In addition, the
frequency of preference for branded or unbranded stimuli
was statistically analyzed by a paired t test. Because the
p-value (0.08) was less than 0.05 (significance level), a
significant difference was observed between the frequen-
cies of preferences.
4.2 Channel selection results
In this study, the channel pair giving the best success was
determined as a ratio of the correlation between the two
channels. While applying the ICA and ABC methods, the
correlations between the channel pairs were calculated
according to the Pearson correlation method. A 2D-matrix
histogram was obtained as a result of calculating Pearson’s
correlations between all channel pairs and is shown in
Fig. 6. The values in the figure show the number of
Fig. 6 2D histogram showing
the correlations between each
channel pair in the ABC method
4589
selected channel pairs. In the histogram, while the channels
in the columns belong to the branded class, the channels in
the rows represent the unbranded class. The results in the
histogram belong to the ABC method, which was suc-
cessful in the classification process.
It can be inferred from the figure that the frontal regions
are more significant in the classification. However, the
frequencies for the selected channels from the parietal,
occipital, and temporal regions are in a narrower spectrum.
In particular, it was concluded that the reciprocal same
channel pairs are not very important in the classification. It
was also observed that, while the channels for the branded
class are mostly selected from the frontal regions, the
channels for the unbranded class are chosen from the
parietal, occipital, or temporal regions. In addition, a his-
togram distribution displaying the significant channel pairs
in the EEG classification is shown in Fig. 7. In this
123
4590
histogram, the channel pairs selected more than eight times
are shown.
The AF3-F7 channel pair had the best success (12
times). Moreover, the AF3-AF3, F7-F3, and F7-FC5
channel pairs were selected ten times, and these channel
pairs are ranked second in the channel selection process
with the ABC. The rest of the channel pairs were selected
nine times. Thus, these results verify the success of ABC in
the channel selection process. The most-selected and the
least-selected channel regions against the branded class are
shown on the brain maps in Fig. 8.
The evoked potentials (EPs) refer to the ensemble data
reconstructed from the EEG signals, which were acquired
for a specific stimulus. The method of examining EPs
usually is used in the process of identifying the most
meaningful channels in neuro-computational studies.
Therefore, in terms of verifying the results obtained from
the channel selection process, the evoked potentials that
belong to the best channel pair (AF3-F7) are shown for
250 ms in Fig. 9.
Figure 9 shows that the EPs in different classes were
significantly decomposed from each other. When the sig-
nals of branded and unbranded classes sequentially come
from AF3 and F7, the decomposition starts after the 200th
millisecond from the onset of the stimulus. Consequently,
it was verified that the EPs coming from the most-selected
channel pairs decompose from each other. The findings
obtained during the channel selection process confirmed
the studies in the literature examining the behavior of the
brain when viewing brands. Accordingly, stimulation in the
brain toward a brand stimulus takes place in the dorsolat-
eral prefrontal cortex region at approximately 200 ms from
the onset [4, 36, 37].
Fig. 7 Most significant channel pairs selected by the ABC in the classification
123
Neural Computing and Applications (2021) 33:4579–4593
To illustrate the methodological innovation of the study,
Table 7 compares the present study with previous studies,
including recent EEG classification studies in the literature.
The table shows that the SVM and ANN algorithms were
usually employed in the classification processes in previous
studies. In most of the studies, channel selection processes
were not used; however, the channels used in the studies
were included in the classification process based on expe-
rience. In the present study, however, the channel selection
process was carried out sensitively with ABC and ICA
methods.
5 Conclusions
The EEG signals acquired against branded and unbranded
stimuli were classified in a four-stage methodological
process. Multiple approaches were used at each stage to
determine the combination achieving the best classifica-
tion. Furthermore, the channel selection process was
involved in the analysis process, and the ABC method was
more successful than ICA in study [18]. Moreover, the
experimental procedure applied in this study had different
characteristics in terms of stimuli, presentation time, task,
and the number of participants [47, 50, 51]. Branded and
unbranded classification concepts rather than a focus on a
specific brand name were investigated in the present study.
The best classification success was achieved in the
approximation using PCA in the feature extraction, ABC in
the channel selection, and ANN in the classification. The
classification performance was about 72% on average in
this approximation. The Qn and Qd values at this success
rate were about 72% and 73%, respectively. In addition,
Neural Computing and Applications (2021) 33:4579–4593 4591

Fig. 8 a Most and b the least-selected brain regions with the ABC; c channel locations

the standard deviation was 3.79. On an individual level, a

classification was achieved with about 85%. According to
the channel selection results, it was observed that the best-
distinguished channel pair was the AF3-F7. Additionally, a
severe decomposition was observed in the signals obtained
from these two channels. When the EPs elicited from these
channels were compared, the decomposition in the ampli-
tudes started after about 200 ms from the onset of the
stimulus. Furthermore, the decomposition was more evi-
dent when the EP sources were changed according to the
Fig. 9 EPs that belong to the most significant channel pair selected by type of stimulus, and studies in the literature confirmed
ABC these findings.

Table 7 Comparison of the methodological aspects of the present study with previous studies
Author(s) Cognitive task Used methods
Feature extraction Channel selection Classification

Present study Smartphone products Branded/Unbranded PCA, AR, PCM ABC, ICA SVM, ANN
Taran and Bajaj [38] Motor imagery Wavelet 8 LS-SVM
Kutlu et al. [39] Mathematical and text MoDP 8 LU-Extreme Learning
Alazrai et al. [40] Tonic cold pain Wavelet 8 Two-layer SVM
Komijani et al. [41] Motor imagery ARMA ICA Neuro-fuzzy ANN
Chea et al. [6] Music listening 8 8 CNN, SVM
Güven et al. [42] Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder Nonlinear features 8 ANN, SVM, Naı̈ve Bayes
Li et al. [43] Motor imagery 8 8 CSP
Saini et al. [44] Lie detection EMD, IMF 8 SVM
Raghu et al. [45] Epileptic seizures Wavelet 8 SVM
Jin et al. [46] Motor imagery CSP 8 SVM, Extreme Learning
Yadava et al. [47] Different products Like / dislike Wavelet 8 Hidden Markov Model
Oon et al. [48] Different products Prefer / not-prefer DFA 8 ANN, kNN
Golnar-Nik et al. [49] Smartphone products Like / dislike Power spectral density 8 SVM, LDA

123
4592
Consequently, the obtained results show that brain
activation for branded and unbranded stimuli can be suc-
cessfully classified with the help of advanced machine
learning algorithms.
Acknowledgment The Scientific Research Unit of Adiyaman
University supported this study with the project number of IIBFMAP/
2017-0003. Adiyaman University Health Sciences Institute has been
approved the study by the ethics committee. The date of the decision
of the ethics committee is 24.10.2017. All subjects participating in
this study signed the informed consent form.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest The author declares that there is no conflict of
interest regarding the publication of this article.
References
1. Bosshard SS, Bourke JD, Kunaharan S et al (2016) Established
liked versus disliked brands: Brain activity, implicit associations
and explicit responses. Cogent Psychol 3:1–16. https://doi.org/10.
1080/23311908.2016.1176691
2. Wang RWY, Chang YC, Chuang SW (2016) EEG Spectral
Dynamics of Video Commercials: Impact of the Narrative on the
Branding Product Preference. Sci Rep 6:1–11. https://doi.org/10.
1038/srep36487
3. Balconi M, Stumpo B, Leanza F (2014) Advertising, brand and
neuromarketing or how consumer brain works. Neuropsychol
Trends 16:15–21. https://doi.org/10.7358/neur-2014-016-balc
4. Plassmann H, Ramsøy TZ, Milosavljevic M (2012) Branding the
brain: A critical review and outlook. J Consum Psychol 22:18–36.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2011.11.010
5. Ariely D, Berns GS (2010) Neuromarketing: the hope and hype
of neuroimaging in business. Nat Rev Neurosci 11:284–292.
https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn2795
6. Cheah KH, Nisar H, Yap VV, Lee CY (2019) Convolutional
neural networks for classification of music-listening EEG: com-
paring 1D convolutional kernels with 2D kernels and cerebral
laterality of musical influence. Neural Comput Appl. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s00521-019-04367-7
7. Shourie N, Firoozabadi M, Badie K (2018) Neurofeedback
training protocols based on spectral EEG feature subset and
channel selection for performance enhancement of novice visual
artists. Biomed Signal Process Control 43:117–129. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.bspc.2018.02.017
8. Özbeyaz A, Arıca S (2018) Familiar/unfamiliar face classification
from EEG signals by utilizing pairwise distant channels and
distinctive time interval. Signal, Image Video Process
12:1181–1188. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11760-018-1269-x
9. Ghaemi A, Rashedi E, Pourrahimi AM et al (2017) Automatic
channel selection in EEG signals for classification of left or right
hand movement in Brain Computer Interfaces using improved
binary gravitation search algorithm. Biomed Signal Process
Control 33:109–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bspc.2016.11.018
10. Özbeyaz A, Arica S (2017) Classification of EEG signals of
familiar and unfamiliar face stimuli exploiting most discrimina-
tive channels. TURKISH J Electr Eng Comput Sci
25:3342–3354. https://doi.org/10.3906/elk-1608-130
11. Murugappan M, Murugappan S, Balaganapathy, Gerard C (2014)
Wireless EEG signals based Neuromarketing system using Fast
123
Neural Computing and Applications (2021) 33:4579–4593
Fourier Transform (FFT). In: 2014 IEEE 10th Int. Colloq. Signal
Process. its Appl. IEEE, pp 25–30
12. Hakkak H, Zade MMK, Azarnoosh M (2018) Analyzing the
impact of neuromarketing to promote brand image based on EEG
signals. J Biomed Imaging Bioeng 3:95–105
13. Zhang Y, Ji X, Liu B et al (2017) Combined feature extraction
method for classification of EEG signals. Neural Comput Appl
28:3153–3161. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-016-2230-y
14. Cao LJ, Chua KS, Chong WK et al (2003) A comparison of PCA,
KPCA and ICA for dimensionality reduction in support vector
machine. Neurocomputing 55:321–336. https://doi.org/10.1016/
S0925-2312(03)00433-8
15. Guo L, Rivero D, Dorado J et al (2010) Automatic epileptic
seizure detection in EEGs based on line length feature and arti-
ficial neural networks. J Neurosci Methods 191:101–109. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jneumeth.2010.05.020
16. Carino-Escobar RI, Cantillo-Negrete J, Gutierrez-Martinez J,
Vazquez RA (2018) Classification of motor imagery electroen-
cephalography signals using spiking neurons with different input
encoding strategies. Neural Comput Appl 30:1289–1301. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s00521-016-2767-9
17. Yongjian Chen, Masatake Akutagawa, Masato Katayama, et al
(2008) ICA based multiple brain sources localization. In: 2008
30th Annu. Int. Conf. IEEE Eng. Med. Biol. Soc. IEEE,
pp 1879–1882
18. Garro BA, Salazar-Varas R, Vazquez RA (2018) EEG Channel
Selection using Fractal Dimension and Artificial Bee Colony
Algorithm. In: 2018 IEEE Symp. Ser. Comput. Intell. IEEE,
pp 499–504
19. Gao J, Lin P, Yang Y et al (2010) Real-time removal of ocular
artifacts from EEG based on independent component analysis and
manifold learning. Neural Comput Appl 19:1217–1226. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s00521-010-0370-z
20. Slanzi G, Balazs JA, Velásquez JD (2017) Combining eye
tracking, pupil dilation and EEG analysis for predicting web users
click intention. Inf Fusion 35:51–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
inffus.2016.09.003
21. Kay SM (1988) Modern spectral estimation: theory and appli-
cation. Prentice Hall, c1988
22. Zhang Y, Liu B, Ji X, Huang D (2017) Classification of EEG
Signals Based on Autoregressive Model and Wavelet Packet
Decomposition. Neural Process Lett 45:365–378. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s11063-016-9530-1
23. Wold S, Esbensen K, Geladi P (1987) Principal component
analysis. Chemom Intell Lab Syst 2:37–52. https://doi.org/10.
1016/0169-7439(87)80084-9
24. Lekshmi SS, Selvam V, Pallikonda Rajasekaran M (2014) EEG
signal classification using Principal Component Analysis and
Wavelet Transform with Neural Network. Int Conf Commun
Signal Process ICCSP 2014 - Proc 687–690. doi: https://doi.org/
10.1109/ICCSP.2014.6949930
25. Jiang B, Ding C, Luo B (2018) Robust data representation using
locally linear embedding guided PCA. Neurocomputing
275:523–532. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neucom.2017.08.053
26. Karaboga D, Akay B, Ozturk C (2007) Artificial Bee Colony
(ABC) Optimization Algorithm for Training Feed-Forward
Neural Networks. Model Decis Artif Intell. https://doi.org/10.
1007/978-3-540-73729-2_30
27. Öztürk C, Aslan S (2016) A new artificial bee colony algorithm to
solve the multiple sequence alignment problem. Int J Data Min
Bioinform 14:332. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJDMB.2016.075823
28. Hsu WY, Hu YP (2015) Artificial bee colony algorithm for sin-
gle-trial electroencephalogram analysis. Clin EEG Neurosci
46:119–125. https://doi.org/10.1177/1550059414538808
29. Bhardwaj A, Gupta A, Jain P, et al (2015) Classification of
human emotions from EEG signals using SVM and LDA
Neural Computing and Applications (2021) 33:4579–4593
Classifiers. In: 2015 2nd Int. Conf. Signal Process. Integr. Net-
works. IEEE, pp 180–185
30. Satapathy SK, Jagadev AK, Dehuri S (2017) An empirical
analysis of different machine learning techniques for classifica-
tion of EEG signal to detect epileptic seizure. Informatica 41:
31. Alkan A, Koklukaya E, Subasi A (2005) Automatic seizure
detection in EEG using logistic regression and artificial neural
network. J Neurosci Methods 148:167–176. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.jneumeth.2005.04.009
32. Adak MF, Lieberzeit P, Jarujamrus P, Yumusak N (2019) Clas-
sification of alcohols obtained by QCM sensors with different
characteristics using ABC based neural network. Eng Sci Technol
an Int J. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jestch.2019.06.011
33. Møller MF (1993) A scaled conjugate gradient algorithm for fast
supervised learning. Neural Networks 6:525–533. https://doi.org/
10.1016/S0893-6080(05)80056-5
34. Fan R-E, Chen P-H, Lin C-J (2005) Working set selection using
second order information for training support vector machines.
J Mach Learn Res 6:1889–1918
35. Duda RO, Hart PE, Stork DG (2000) Pattern Classification, 2nd
edn. Wiley, New York, USA
36. Milosavljevic M, Koch C, Rangel A (2011) Consumers can make
decisions in as little as a third of a second. Judgm Decis Mak
6:520–530
37. Junghöfer M (2010) A fast neural signature of motivated attention
to consumer goods separates the sexes. Front Hum Neurosci.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2010.00179
38. Taran S, Bajaj V (2019) Motor imagery tasks-based EEG signals
classification using tunable-Q wavelet transform. Neural Comput
Appl 31:6925–6932. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-018-3531-0
39. Kutlu Y, Yayık A, Yildirim E, Yildirim S (2019) LU triangu-
larization extreme learning machine in EEG cognitive task clas-
sification. Neural Comput Appl 31:1117–1126. https://doi.org/10.
1007/s00521-017-3142-1
40. Alazrai R, Momani M, Khudair HA, Daoud MI (2019) EEG-
based tonic cold pain recognition system using wavelet trans-
form. Neural Comput Appl 31:3187–3200. https://doi.org/10.
1007/s00521-017-3263-6
41. Komijani H, Parsaei MR, Khajeh E et al (2019) EEG classifica-
tion using recurrent adaptive neuro-fuzzy network based on time-
series prediction. Neural Comput Appl 31:2551–2562. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s00521-017-3213-3
4593
42. Güven A, Altınkaynak M, Dolu N et al (2019) Combining
functional near-infrared spectroscopy and EEG measurements for
the diagnosis of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder. Neural
Comput Appl. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-019-04294-7
43. Li L, Xu G, Xie J, Li M (2019) Classification of single-trial motor
imagery EEG by complexity regularization. Neural Comput Appl
31:1959–1965. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-017-3174-6
44. Saini N, Bhardwaj S, Agarwal R (2019) Classification of EEG
signals using hybrid combination of features for lie detection.
Neural Comput Appl. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-019-04078-
z
45. Raghu S, Sriraam N, Vasudeva Rao S et al (2019) Automated
detection of epileptic seizures using successive decomposition
index and support vector machine classifier in long-term EEG.
Neural Comput Appl. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-019-04389-
1
46. Jin Z, Zhou G, Gao D, Zhang Y (2018) EEG classification using
sparse Bayesian extreme learning machine for brain–computer
interface. Neural Comput Appl. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-
018-3735-3
47. Yadava M, Kumar P, Saini R et al (2017) Analysis of EEG
signals and its application to neuromarketing. Multimed Tools
Appl 76:19087–19111. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-017-4580-
6
48. Oon HN, Saidatul A, Ibrahim Z (2018) Analysis on Non-Linear
Features of Electroencephalogram (EEG) Signal for Neuromar-
keting Application. In: 2018 Int. Conf. Comput. Approach Smart
Syst. Des. Appl. IEEE, pp 1–8
49. Golnar-Nik P, Farashi S, Safari M-S (2019) The application of
EEG power for the prediction and interpretation of consumer
decision-making: A neuromarketing study. Physiol Behav
207:90–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physbeh.2019.04.025
50. Kumar S, Yadava M, Roy PP (2019) Fusion of EEG response and
sentiment analysis of products review to predict customer satis-
faction. Inf Fusion 52:41–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inffus.
2018.11.001
51. Akkar HAR, Jasim FBA (2018) Intelligent training algorithm for
artificial neural network EEG classifications. Int J Intell Syst
Appl 10:33–41. https://doi.org/10.5815/ijisa.2018.05.04
Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to
jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
123