Advertisement

Low Data Fusion Framework Oriented to Information Quality for BCI Systems

  • Miguel Alberto Becerra
  • Karla C. Alvarez-Uribe
  • Diego Hernán Peluffo-Ordoñez
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10814)

Abstract

The evaluation of the data/information fusion systems does not have standard quality criteria making the reuse and optimization of these systems a complex task. In this work, we propose a complete low data fusion (DF) framework based on the Joint Director of Laboratories (JDL) model, which considers contextual information alongside information quality (IQ) and performance evaluation system to optimize the DF process according to the user requirements. A set of IQ criteria was proposed by level. The model was tested with a brain-computer interface (BCI) system multi-environment to prove its functionality. The first level makes the selection and preprocessing of electroencephalographic signals. In level one feature extraction is carried out using discrete wavelet transform (DWT), nonlinear and linear statistical measures, and Fuzzy Rough Set – FRS algorithm for selecting the relevant features; finally, in the same level a classification process was conducted using support vector machine – SVM. A Fuzzy Inference system is used for controlling different processes based on the results given by an IQ evaluation system, which applies quality measures that can be weighted by the users of the system according to their requirements. Besides, the system is optimized based on the results given by the cuckoo search algorithm, which uses the IQ traceability for maximizing the IQ criteria according to user requirements. The test was carried out with different type and levels of noise applied to the signals. The results showed the capability and functionality of the model.

Keywords

Brain-computer interface Data fusion Evaluation system Information quality 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the Doctoral thesis “Data fusion model oriented to information quality” at the “Universidad Nacional of Colombia”.

References

  1. 1.
    Leeb, R., Sagha, H., Chavarriaga, R., del R Millán, J.: A hybrid brain–computer interface based on the fusion of electroencephalographic and electromyographic activities. J. Neural Eng. 8(2), 025011 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Oken, B., Orhan, U., Roark, B., Erdogmus, D., Fowler, A., Mooney, A., Peters, B., Miller, M., Fried-Oken, M.B.: Brain-computer interface with language model-electroencephalography fusion for locked-in syndrome. Neurorehabil. Neural Repair 28(4), 387–394 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Smith, D., Singh, S.: Approaches to multisensor data fusion in target tracking: a survey. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 18(12), 1696–1710 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ardeshir Goshtasby, A., Nikolov, S.: Image fusion: advances in the state of the art. Inf. Fusion 8(2), 114–118 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hadzagic, M., Valin, P., Shahbazian, E.: Reliability and relevance in the Thresholded Dempster-Shafer Algorithm for ESM data fusion. In: Information Fusion (FUSION), pp. 615–620 (2012)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Khaleghi, B., Khamis, A., Karray, F.O., Razavi, S.N.: Multisensor data fusion: a review of the state-of-the-art. Inf. Fusion 14(1), 28–44 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Esteban, J., Starr, A., Willetts, R., Hannah, P., Bryanston-Cross, P.: A review of data fusion models and architectures: towards engineering guidelines. Neural Comput. Appl. 14(4), 273–281 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sidek, O., Quadri, S.A.: A review of data fusion models and systems. Int. J. Image Data Fusion 3(1), 3–21 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rogova, G.L., Bosse, E.: Information quality in information fusion. In: 2010 13th International Conference on Information Fusion, pp. 1–8 (2010)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lahat, D., Adaly, T., Jutten, C.: Challenges in multimodal data fusion. In: 2014 Proceedings of the 22nd European Signal Processing Conference (EUSIPCO), pp. 101–105 (2014)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    van Laere, J.: Challenges for IF performance evaluation in practice. In: 2009 12th International Conference on Information Fusion, FUSION 2009, pp. 866–873 (2009)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Wang, R.Y., Strong, D.M.: Beyond accuracy: what data quality means to data consumers. J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 12(4), 5–33 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lee, Y.W., Strong, D.M., Kahn, B.K., Wang, R.Y.: AIMQ: a methodology for information quality assessment. Inf. Manag. 40(2), 133–146 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Stvilia, B., Gasser, L., Twidale, M.B., Smith, L.C.: A framework for information quality assessment. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 58(12), 1720–1733 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Blasch, E., Valin, P., Bosse, E.: Measures of effectiveness for high-level fusion. In: 2010 13th International Conference on Information Fusion, pp. 1–8 (2010)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Todoran, I., Lecornu, L., Khenchaf, A., Le Caillec, J.-M.: A methodology to evaluate important dimensions of information. ACM J. Data Inf. Qual. 6(2–3), 23 (2015). Article no. 11Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rogova, G.L.: Information quality in information fusion and decision making with applications to crisis management. In: Rogova, G., Scott, P. (eds.) Fusion Methodologies in Crisis Management, pp. 65–86. Springer, Cham (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-22527-2_4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Steinberg, A.N., Bowman, C.L., White, F.E.: Revisions to the JDL Data Fusion. Data Fusion Lex. by JDL (1991)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wang, Y.R., Ziad, M., Lee, Y.W.: Data Quality. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (2002)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ortega-Adarme, M., Moreno-Revelo, M., Peluffo-Ordoñez, D.H., Marín Castrillon, D., Castro-Ospina, A.E., Becerra, M.A.: Analysis of motor imaginary BCI within multi-environment scenarios using a mixture of classifiers. In: Solano, A., Ordoñez, H. (eds.) CCC 2017. CCIS, vol. 735, pp. 511–523. Springer, Cham (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66562-7_37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mendes, P.N., Mühleisen, H., Bizer, C.: Sieve: linked data quality assessment and fusion, pp. 116–123 (2012)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Haug, A., Haug, A., Zachariassen, F., van Liempd, D.: The costs of poor data quality. J. Ind. Eng. Manag. 4(2), 168–193 (2011)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Cabitza, F., Batini, C.: Information quality in healthcare. Data and Information Quality. DSA, pp. 403–419. Springer, Cham (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-24106-7_13CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Miguel Alberto Becerra
    • 1
  • Karla C. Alvarez-Uribe
    • 1
  • Diego Hernán Peluffo-Ordoñez
    • 2
  1. 1.Instituto Tecnológico MetropolitanoMedellínColombia
  2. 2.Yachay TechUrcuquíEcuador

Personalised recommendations