MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2039635826 · doi:10.5339/qfarf.2013.biop-041

Energy-efficient data reduction techniques for EEG wireless body sensor networks

2013· article· en· W2039635826 on OpenAlexaff
Rabab Ward

Bibliographic record

VenueQatar Foundation Annual Research Forum Volume 2013 Issue 1 · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceWireless sensor networkBrain–computer interfaceWirelessElectroencephalographyInterface (matter)Real-time computingEnergy (signal processing)SIGNAL (programming language)Embedded systemComputer hardwareComputer networkTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With recent advances in signal processing and very-low-power wireless communications, wireless body sensor networks (WBSNs) are gaining wide popularity. A WBSN consists of multiple miniaturized sensors that are placed on the person's body and are capable of measuring and communicating different physiological signals over time. This study focuses on WBSNs that rely on electroencephalogram (EEG) signals. EEG signals measure the electrical brain activity through a collection of non-invasive wireless sensors placed on a patient's scalp. Two applications are studied: the development of brain computer interfaces (BCIs), and the detection of epileptic seizures. A BCI is a direct interface between the brain and a machine. It can be used for purposes such as helping a patient perform a task by thought only, i.e. without performing any motor actions. In such a case, the BCI has to detect the presence of specific command signals in the EEG signals. A WBSN has the advantage of being minimally obtrusive to the patient. This is because the signals are transmitted wirelessly from the person's body; a person can therefore move freely without worrying about surrounding wires. However, in WBSN applications, the energy available in the battery-powered sensors is limited. Different solutions to minimize the number of computations carried out and the amount of data transmitted by the sensor are therefore highly desired. In this study, we present computationally-efficient data reduction techniques to reduce the energy consumption at the sensor node while keeping the salient information in the EEG signals. To efficiently compress EEG signals at the sensor node, we propose the use of a compressed sensing (CS) framework. The proposed CS scheme is simple, nonadaptive and yields higher energy efficiency than existing frameworks. To obtain a high compression ratio, our CS framework exploits not only the temporal correlation within EEG signals in each channel as is the case in existing frameworks, but also the inter-correlation amongst different EEG channels. When applied to a simple BCI system, our proposed framework resulted in important energy savings (up to 60%) at the expense of a slightly reduced classification accuracy. Existing BCIs require all the EEG signals as input. Therefore, the EEG signals must be reconstructed as perfectly as possible at the receiver side. For seizure detection however, the main aim is not to reconstruct the EEG signals but to detect the occurrence of a seizure. In addition to the above CS technique, we examined different data reduction techniques at the sensor side of an EEG seizure detection system. The extraction and transmission of certain features of the EEG signals were found to yield best results. The performance of these techniques was evaluated based on power consumption and seizure detection efficacy. Experimental results showed that by performing low-complexity feature extraction and transmitting only the features that are pertinent to seizure detection, considerable overall energy is saved. The battery life of the system is increased 14 times relative to the conventional approach of transmitting all the original EEG signals, while the same seizure detection performance is maintained (94.1% sensitivity).

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.063
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.308 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQatar Foundation Annual Research Forum Volume 2013 Issue 1Same topicEEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesFrench-language works237,207