Evaluating Convolutional Neural Networks as a Method of EEG–EMG Fusion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wearable robotic exoskeletons have emerged as an exciting new treatment tool for disorders affecting mobility; however, the human-machine interface, used by the patient for device control, requires further improvement before robotic assistance and rehabilitation can be widely adopted. One method, made possible through advancements in machine learning technology, is the use of bioelectrical signals, such as electroencephalography (EEG) and electromyography (EMG), to classify the user's actions and intentions. While classification using these signals has been demonstrated for many relevant control tasks, such as motion intention detection and gesture recognition, challenges in decoding the bioelectrical signals have caused researchers to seek methods for improving the accuracy of these models. One such method is the use of EEG-EMG fusion, creating a classification model that decodes information from both EEG and EMG signals simultaneously to increase the amount of available information. So far, EEG-EMG fusion has been implemented using traditional machine learning methods that rely on manual feature extraction; however, new machine learning methods have emerged that can automatically extract relevant information from a dataset, which may prove beneficial during EEG-EMG fusion. In this study, Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) models were developed using combined EEG-EMG inputs to determine if they have potential as a method of EEG-EMG fusion that automatically extracts relevant information from both signals simultaneously. EEG and EMG signals were recorded during elbow flexion-extension and used to develop CNN models based on time-frequency (spectrogram) and time (filtered signal) domain image inputs. The results show a mean accuracy of 80.51 ± 8.07% for a three-class output (33.33% chance level), with an F-score of 80.74%, using time-frequency domain-based models. This work demonstrates the viability of CNNs as a new method of EEG-EMG fusion and evaluates different signal representations to determine the best implementation of a combined EEG-EMG CNN. It leverages modern machine learning methods to advance EEG-EMG fusion, which will ultimately lead to improvements in the usability of wearable robotic exoskeletons.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".