i-manager Publications

Effect of Sampling Frequency on SNR in the Removal of Ocular Artifacts in EEG Signals using Wavelets

B. Krishna Kumar*

Department of Electronics and Communication Engineering, Methodist College of Engineering and Technology, Hyderabad, Telangana, India.

Periodicity:July - September'2019
DOI : https://doi.org/10.26634/jdp.7.3.17343

Abstract

This study investigates the relationship between sampling frequency and SNR of Electroencephalogram (EEG) signal. The EEG is a standard technique for investigating the electrical activity of brains in different psychological and pathological states. At the time of EEG recording, various artifacts such as muscle activity, eye blinks, eye movements and electrical noise corrupt the EEG signal. Normally, EEG signals fall in the frequency range of DC to 60 Hz and amplitude of 1-5 µv. Ocular artifacts have the similar statistical properties of EEG signals, and often interfere with EEG signal, making the analysis of EEG signals more complex. In this research paper, two different datasets were taken from Physionet data base. The sampling frequency of one dataset is 100Hz and the sampling frequency of another dataset is 250Hz. The research paper attempts to establish the relationship between sampling frequency and SNR of EEG signal. In this paper, the collected EEG signals are normalized and then mixed linearly with the normalized Electrooculography (EOG) signals, resulting in noisy EEG signals. Later soft and hard thresholding techniques were applied for detail coefficients and to estimate the SNR of the denoised EEG signals. This research paper concludes that signals with lower sampling rates provide better SNR than the signals with higher sampling rates. In addition to this, Haar wavelet provided better SNR compared to dB10 and Sym8 wavelets.

Keywords

Sampling Frequency, SNR, Wavelets, EEG, EOG.

How to Cite this Article?

Kumar, B. K. (2019). Effect of Sampling Frequency on SNR in the Removal of Ocular Artifacts in EEG Signals using Wavelets. i-manager’s Journal on Digital Signal Processing. 7(3), 16-20. https://doi.org/10.26634/jdp.7.3.17343

References

[1]. Almubarak, S., & Wong, P. K. (2011). Long-term clinical outcome of neonatal EEG findings. Journal of Clinical Neurophysiology, 28(2), 185-189. http://doi.org/10.1097/ WNP.0b013e3182121731

[2]. Arab, M. R., Suratgar, A. A., Martínez-Hernández, V. M., & Rezaei Ashtiani, A. (2010). Electroencephalogram signals processing for the diagnosis of petit mal and grand mal epilepsies using an artificial neural network. Journal of Applied Research and Technology, 8(1), 120-128.

[3]. Gratton, G., Coles, M. G., & Donchin, E. (1983). A new method for off-line removal of ocular artifact. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 55(4), 468-484. https:/ doi.org/10.1016/0013- 4694(83)90135-9

[4]. Holmes, G. L., & Lombroso, C. T. (1993). Prognostic value of background patterns in the neonatal EEG. Journal of Clinical Neurophysiology, 10, 323-323.

[5]. Jung, T. P., Makeig, S., Humphries, C., Lee, T. W., Mckeown, M. J., Iragui, V., & Sejnowski, T. J. (2000). Removing electroen cephalographic artifacts by blind source separation. Psychophysiology, 37(2), 163-178. https://doi.org/10.1111/1469-8986.3720163

[6]. Kumar, B. K. (2019). Denoising of EEG signals using wavelets and various thresholding techniques. International Journal of Electronics Engineering, 11(2), 261-269.

[7]. Kumar, B. K., Prasad, K. V. S. V. R., & Alekhya, D. (2016, August). Performance comparision of various thresholding techniques on the removal of ocular artifacts in the EEG signals. In 2016 International Conference on Inventive Computation Technologies (ICICT) (Vol. 3, pp. 1-5). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/INVENTIVE.2016.7830179

[8]. Mathworks. (n.d.). MATLAB for Artificial Intelligence. Retrieved from https://www.mathworks.com/

[9]. Murugavel, A. M., & Ramakrishnan, S. (2012). Tree based wavelet transform and DAG SVM for seizure detection. Signal & Image Processing, 3(1), 115-125.

[10]. Niedermeyer, E., & da Silva, F. L. (2005). Electroencephalography: Basic Principles, Clinical Applications, and Related Fields. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

[11]. PhysioNet. (n.d.). The Research Resource for Complex Physiologic Signals. Retrieved from https:// www.physionet.org/

[12]. Schlögl, A., Keinrath, C., Zimmermann, D., Scherer, R., Leeb, R., & Pfurtscheller, G. (2007). A fully automated correction method of EOG artifacts in EEG recordings. Clinical Neurophysiology, 118(1), 98-104. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.clinph.2006.09.003

[13]. Thakor, N. V., Xin-Rong, G., Yi-Chun, S., & Hanley, D. F. (1993). Multiresolution wavelet analysis of evoked potentials. IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering, 40(11), 1085-1094. http://doi.org/10.1109/10.245625

[14]. Venkataramanan, S., Prabhat, P., Choudhury, S. R., Nemade, H. B., & Sahambi, J. S. (2005, January). Biomedical instrumentation based on electrooculogram (EOG) signal processing and application to a hospital alarm system. In Proceedings of 2005 International Conference on Intelligent Sensing and Information Processing (pp. 535-540). IEEE. http://doi.org/10.1109 /ICISIP.2005.1529512

If you have access to this article please login to view the article or kindly login to purchase the article

Single Article

	North Americas,UK, Middle East,Europe		India	Rest of world
	USD	EUR	INR	USD-ROW
Online	15	15

ADD TO CART

Options for accessing this content:

If you would like institutional access to this content, please recommend the title to your librarian.
If you already have i-manager's user account: Login above and proceed to purchase the article.
New Users: Please register, then proceed to purchase the article.