skip to main content
10.1145/3377930.3390198acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesgeccoConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Open Access

Impact of NSGA-II objectives on EEG feature selection related to motor imagery

Published:26 June 2020Publication History

ABSTRACT

The selection of ElectroEncephaloGram (EEG) features with functional relevance to Motor Imagery (MI) is a crucial task for successful outcome in Brain-Computer Interface (BCI)-based motor rehabilitation. Individual EEG patterns during MI requires subject-dependent feature selection, which is an arduous task due to the complexity and large number of features. One solution is to use metaheuristics, e.g. Genetic Algorithm (GA), to avoid an exhaustive search which is impractical. In this work, one of the most widely used GA, NSGA-II, is used with an hierarchical individual representation to facilitate the exclusion of EEG channels irrelevant for MI. In essence, the performance of different objectives in NSGA-II was evaluated on a previously recorded MI EEG data set. Empirical results show that k-Nearest Neighbors (k-NN) combined with Pearson's Correlation (PCFS) as objective functions yielded higher classification accuracy as compared to the other objective-combinations (73% vs. 69%). Linear Discriminant Analysis (LDA) combined with Feature Reduction (FR) as objective functions maximized the reduction of features (99.6%) but reduced classification performance (65.6%). All classifier objectives combined with PCFS selected similar features in accordance with expected activity patterns during MI. In conclusion, PCFS and a classifier as objective functions constitutes a good trade-off solution for MI data.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

References

  1. J. Asensio-Cubero, J.Q. Ga, and R. Palaniappan. 2013. Multiresolution analysis over simple graphs for brain computer interfaces. Journal of Neural Engineering 10, 4 (2013), 046014.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. T Back and H P Schwefel. 1993. An overview of evolutionary algorithms for parameter optimization. Evolutionary computation 1, 1 (1993), 1--23.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. C. Blum and A. Roli. 2003. Metaheuristics in combinatorial optimization: Overview and conceptual comparison. ACM computing surveys (CSUR) 35, 3 (2003), 268--308.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Claudio Carvalhaes and J Acacio de Barros. 2015. The surface Laplacian technique in EEG: Theory and methods. International Journal of Psychophysiology 97, 3 (2015), 174--188.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. A. Chakraborty and A.K. Kar. 2017. Swarm intelligence: A review of algorithms. In Nature-Inspired Computing and Optimization. Springer, 475--494.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. R. Chatterjee and T. Bandyopadhyay. 2016. EEG based Motor Imagery Classification using SVM and MLP. In 2nd International Conference on Computational Intelligence and Networks (CINE). 84--89.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. T.M. Cover and P. Hart. 1967. Nearest neighbor pattern classification. IEEE transactions on information theory 13, 1 (1967), 21--27.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. K Deb, S. Agrawal, A Pratap, and T. Meyarivan. 2000. A fast elitist non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm for multi-objective optimization: NSGA-II. In International conference on parallel problem solving from nature. Springer, Berlin, 849--858.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. K. Deb, A. Pratap, S. Agarwal, and T. MEyarivan. 2002. A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II. IEEE Transaction on Evolutionary Computation 6, 2 (2002), 182--197.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. J.S. Ebersole and T.A. Pedley. 2003. Current practice of clinical electroencephalography. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. H.H. Ehrsson, S. Geyer, and E. Naito. 2003. Imagery of voluntary movement of fingers, toes, and tongue activates corresponding body-part-specific motor representations. J. Neurophysiol. 90 (2003), 3304--3316.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. L. Fabien, L. Anatole, L. Fabrice, and A. Bruno. 2007. Studying the use of fuzzy inference systems for motor imagery classification. IEEE transactions on neural systems and rehabilitation engineering 15, 2 (2007), 322--324.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. D E Goldberg. 1989. Genetic Algorithm in Search, Optimization and Machine Learning. In Addison-Wesley, New York.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. M. Gong and Y.H. Yang. 2001. Multi-resolution stereo matching using genetic algorithm. In IEEE workshop on Stereo and Multi-Baseline Vision. 21--29.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Jesús González, Julio Ortega, Miguel Damas, Pedro Martín-Smith, and John Q. Gan. 2019. A new multi-objective wrapper method for feature selection - Accuracy and stability analysis for BCI. Neurocomputing 333 (2019), 407--418. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. E. Gysels, P. Renevery, and P. Celka. 2005. SVM-based recursive feature elimination to compare phase synchronization computed from broadband and narrowband EEG signals in brain-computer interfaces. Signal Processing 85, 11 (2005), 2178--2189.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. I.T. Hettiarachchi, T.T. Nguyen, and S. Nahavandi. 2014. Motor imagery data classification for BCI application using wavelet packet feature extraction. In International Conference on Neural Information Processing. 519--526.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. A.K. Jain, J. Mao, and K.M. Mohiuddin. 1996. Artificial neural networks: A tutorial. Computer 3 (1996), 31--44.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Chea Yau Kee, S. G. Ponnambalam, and Chu Kiong Loo. 2015. Multi-objective genetic algorithm as channel selection method for P300 and motor imagery data set. Neurocomputing 161, Mi (2015), 120--131. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. R Khosrowabadi, R. Quek, C. Ang, K.K. Tung, and M. Heijnen. 2011. A Brain-Computer Interface for classifying EEG correlates of chronic mental stress. In International Joint Conference on Neural Networks. 757--762.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. S Kirkpatrick, C D Gelantt, and M P Vecchi. 1983. Optimization by simulated annealing. Science 220 (1983), 671--680.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. H. Lee and S. Choi. 2003. Pca+hmm+svm for eeg pattern classification. In Seventh International Symposium on Signal Processing and Its Applications. 541--554.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Miguel Leon, Joaquin Ballesteros, Jonatan Tidare, Ning Xiong, and Elaine Astrand. 2019. Feature Selection of EEG OScillatory Activity Related to Motor Imagery Using a Hierarchical Genetic Algorithm. IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation (2019), 8.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. J. Lv and M. Liu. 2008. Common Spatial Pattern and Particle Swarm Optimization for Channel Selection in BCI. In 3rd International Conference on Innovative Computing Information and Control. 457--457.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. A Madureira, C Ramos, and S do Carmo Silva. 2002. A Coordination MEchanism for Real World Scheduling Problems using Genetic Algorithms. In IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation. 175--180.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. A. Mukhopadhyay, U. Maulik, S. Bandyopadhyay, and C. A. C. Coello. 2014. A Survey of Multiobjective Evolutionary Algorithms for Data Mining: Part I. IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. 18 (2014), 4--19.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. G. Pfurtscheller and F.H. Lopes da Silva. 1999. Event-related EEG/MEG synchronization and desynchronization: basic principles. Clin. Neurophysiol. 110 (1999), 1842--1857.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. G. Pfurtscheller and C Neuper. 1997. Motor imagery activates primary sensorimotor area in humans. Neurosci. Lett. 239 (1997), 65--68.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. F Pichiorri, G. Morone, M. Petti, J. Toppi, I. Pisotta, M. Molinari, S. Paolucci, M. Inghilleri, L. Astolfi, F. Cincotti, and Et Al. 2015. Brain-computer interface boosts motor imagery practice during stroke recovery. Ann. Neurol. 77 (2015), 851--865.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. A.C. Ramos, R.G. Hernandez, and M. Vellasco. 2016. Feature Selection methods applied to Motor Imagery task classification. In IEEE Latin American Conference on Computational Intelligence (LA-CCI). 1--6.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Rinku Roy, Debdeep Sikdar, Manjunatha Mahadevappa, and CS Kumar. 2017. EEG based motor imagery study of time domain features for classification of power and precision hand grasps. In Neural Engineering (NER), 2017 8th International IEEE/EMBS Conference on. IEEE, 440--443.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  32. R Ruiz and T Stutzle. 2007. A simple and effective iterated greedy algorithm for the permutation flowshop scheduling problem. European Journal of Operational Research 177, 3 (2007), 2033--2049.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. S Russell and P Norvig. 2016. Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach. In Malaysia: Pearson Education Limited.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. A Schloegl, C Neuper, and G Pfurtscheller. 1997. Subject specific EEG patterns during motor imaginary [sic.: for imaginary read imagery]. In Proceedings of the 19th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Magnificent Milestones and Emerging Opportunities in Medical Engineering? (Cat. No.97CH36136, Vol. 4. 1530--1532.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. M. Schroder, M. Bogdan, T. Hinterberger, and N. Birbaumer. 2003. Automated EEG feature selection for brain computer interfaces. In First International IEEE EMBS Conference on Neural Engineering. 626--629.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. R Sitaram, T. Ros, L. Stoeckel, S. Haller, F. Scharnowski, J. Lewis-Peacock, N. Weiskopf, M.L. Blefari, M. Rana, E. Oblak, and Et Al. 2017. Closed-loop brain training: the science of neurofeedback. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 18, 2 (2017), 86--100.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  37. N Srinivas and K. Deb. 1994. Muiltiobjective Optimization Using Nondominated Sorting in Genetic Algorithms. Evol. Comput. 2 (1994), 221--248.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. A. Subasi and M.I. Gursoy. 2010. EEG signal classification using PCA, ICA, LDA and support vector machines. Expert systems with applications 37, 12 (2010), 8659--8666.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Jonatan Tidare, Miguel Leon, Ning Xiong, and E Astrand. 2019. Discriminating EEG spectral power related to mental imagery of closing and opening of hand. In 2019 9th International IEEE/EMBS Conference on Neural Engineering (NER). IEEE, 307--310.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  40. Christopher Torrence and Gilbert P Compo. 1998. A practical guide to wavelet analysis. Bulletin of the American Meteorological society 79, 1 (1998), 61--78.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Impact of NSGA-II objectives on EEG feature selection related to motor imagery

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Conferences
        GECCO '20: Proceedings of the 2020 Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference
        June 2020
        1349 pages
        ISBN:9781450371285
        DOI:10.1145/3377930

        Copyright © 2020 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 26 June 2020

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article

        Acceptance Rates

        Overall Acceptance Rate1,669of4,410submissions,38%

        Upcoming Conference

        GECCO '24
        Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference
        July 14 - 18, 2024
        Melbourne , VIC , Australia

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader