Medical & Biological Engineering & Computing

, Volume 45, Issue 5, pp 495–503

Removal of ocular artifacts from the EEG: a comparison between time-domain regression method and adaptive filtering method using simulated data

  • Ping He
  • Glenn Wilson
  • Christopher Russell
  • Maria Gerschutz
Original Article

Abstract

We recently proposed an adaptive filtering (AF) method for removing ocular artifacts from EEG recordings. The method employs two parameters: the forgetting factor λ and the filter length M. In this paper, we first show that when λ = M = 1, the adaptive filtering method becomes equivalent to the widely used time-domain regression method. The role of λ (when less than one) is to deal with the possible non-stationary relationship between the reference EOG and the EOG component in the EEG. To demonstrate the role of M, a simulation study is carried out that quantitatively evaluates the accuracy of the adaptive filtering method under different conditions and comparing with the accuracy of the regression method. The results show that when there is a shape difference or a misalignment between the reference EOG and the EOG artifact in the EEG, the adaptive filtering method can be more accurate in recovering the true EEG by using an M larger than one (e.g. M = 2 or 3).

Keywords

Adaptive filtering Electroencephalogram (EEG) Electro-oculogram (EOG) Noise canceling Regression method 

References

  1. 1.
    Croft RJ, Barry RJ (2000) Removal of ocular artifact from the EEG: a review. Neurophysiol Clin 30:5–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Comstock JR, Arnegard RJ (1992) The multi-attribute task battery for human operator and strategic behavior research, NASA Technical Memorandum 104174Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Erfanian A, Mahmoudi B (2005) Real-time ocular artifact suppression using recurrent neural network for electro-encephalogram based brain-computer interface. Med Biol Eng Comput 43:296–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gasser T, Sroka L, Möcks J (1985) The transfer of EOG activity into the EEG for eyes open and closed. Elecroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 61:181–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gratton G, Coles MGH, Donchin E (1983) A new method for off-line removal of ocular artifacts. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 55:468–484CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    He P, Wilson G, Russell C (2004) Removal of ocular artifacts from electro-encephalogram by adaptive filtering. Med Biol Eng Comput 24:407–412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jung TP, Makeig S, Westerfield M, Townsend J, Courchesne E, Sejnowski TJ (2000) Removal of eye activity artifacts from visual event-related potential in normal and clinical subjects. Clin Neurophysiol 111:1745–1758CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kenemans JL, Molenaar PCM, Verbaten MN, Slangen JL (1991) Removal of the ocular artifact from the EEG: a comparison of time and frequency domain methods with simulated and real data. Psychophysiology 28:115–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lagerlund TD, Sharbrough FW, Busacker NE (1997) Spatial filtering of multichannel electroencephalographic recordings through principal component analysis by singular value decomposition. J Clin Neurophysiol 14:73–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lins OG, Picton TW, Berg P, Scherg M (1993) Ocular artifacts in recording EEGs and even-related potentials: II. Source dipoles and source components. Brain Topogr 6:65–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Quilter PM, MacGillivray BB, Wadbrook DG (1977) The removal of eye movement artifact from EEG signals using correlation techniques. Random signal analysis, IEEE Conference Publication 159:93–100Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Shoker L, Sanei S, Wang W, Chambers JA (2005) Removal of eye blinking artifact from the electro-encephalogram, incorporating a new constrained blink source separation algorithm. Med Biol Eng Comput 43:290–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wallstrom GL, Kass RE, Miller A, Cohn JF, Fox NA (2004) Automatic correction of ocular artifacts in the EEG: a comparison of regression-based and component-based methods. Int J Psychophysiol 53:105–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Whitton JL, Lue F, Moldofsky H (1978) A spectral method for removing eye movement artifacts from the EEG. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 44:735–741CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Widrow B, Glover JR, McCool JM, Kaunitz J, Williams CS, Hearn RH, Zeidler JR, Dong E, Goodlin RC (1975) Adaptive noise canceling: principles and applications. Proc IEEE 63:1692–1716CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Woestenburg JC, Verbaten MN, Slanger JL (1983) The removal of the eye-movement artifact from the EEG by regression analysis in the frequency domain. Biol Psychol 16:127–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© International Federation for Medical and Biological Engineering 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ping He
    • 1
  • Glenn Wilson
    • 2
  • Christopher Russell
    • 2
  • Maria Gerschutz
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Biomedical, Industrial and Human Factors EngineeringWright State UniversityDaytonUSA
  2. 2.Air Force Research LabWright-Patterson Air Force BaseDaytonUSA

Personalised recommendations