An adaptive singular spectrum analysis method for extracting brain rhythms of electroencephalography

• Published in: PeerJ (San Francisco, CA) Vol. 5; p. e3474
• Main Authors: Hu, Hai, Guo, Shengxin, Liu, Ran, Wang, Peng
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States PeerJ. Ltd 28.06.2017; PeerJ, Inc; PeerJ Inc
• Subjects: Adaptive singular spectrum analysis; Artifacts removal; Bioengineering; Brain mapping; Brain research; Cognition & reasoning; Computational Biology; Decomposition; EEG; Eigenvalues; Electroencephalography; Engineering; Fourier transforms; Methods; Neuroscience; Noise; Rhythm; Rhythms extraction; Spectrum analysis; Time series; Artifacts removal; EEG; Rhythms extraction; Adaptive singular spectrum analysis
• ISSN: 2167-8359; 2167-8359
• DOI: 10.7717/peerj.3474

Artifacts removal and rhythms extraction from electroencephalography (EEG) signals are important for portable and wearable EEG recording devices. Incorporating a novel grouping rule, we proposed an adaptive singular spectrum analysis (SSA) method for artifacts removal and rhythms extraction. Based on the EEG signal amplitude, the grouping rule determines adaptively the first one or two SSA reconstructed components as artifacts and removes them. The remaining reconstructed components are then grouped based on their peak frequencies in the Fourier transform to extract the desired rhythms. The grouping rule thus enables SSA to be adaptive to EEG signals containing different levels of artifacts and rhythms. The simulated EEG data based on the Markov Process Amplitude (MPA) EEG model and the experimental EEG data in the eyes-open and eyes-closed states were used to verify the adaptive SSA method. Results showed a better performance in artifacts removal and rhythms extraction, compared with the wavelet decomposition (WDec) and another two recently reported SSA methods. Features of the extracted alpha rhythms using adaptive SSA were calculated to distinguish between the eyes-open and eyes-closed states. Results showed a higher accuracy (95.8%) than those of the WDec method (79.2%) and the infinite impulse response (IIR) filtering method (83.3%).