Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
129 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
28 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
42 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

EEG_GLT-Net: Optimising EEG Graphs for Real-time Motor Imagery Signals Classification (2404.11075v1)

Published 17 Apr 2024 in cs.LG, cs.AI, and eess.SP

Abstract: Brain-Computer Interfaces connect the brain to external control devices, necessitating the accurate translation of brain signals such as from electroencephalography (EEG) into executable commands. Graph Neural Networks (GCN) have been increasingly applied for classifying EEG Motor Imagery signals, primarily because they incorporates the spatial relationships among EEG channels, resulting in improved accuracy over traditional convolutional methods. Recent advances by GCNs-Net in real-time EEG MI signal classification utilised Pearson Coefficient Correlation (PCC) for constructing adjacency matrices, yielding significant results on the PhysioNet dataset. Our paper introduces the EEG Graph Lottery Ticket (EEG_GLT) algorithm, an innovative technique for constructing adjacency matrices for EEG channels. It does not require pre-existing knowledge of inter-channel relationships, and it can be tailored to suit both individual subjects and GCN model architectures. Our findings demonstrated that the PCC method outperformed the Geodesic approach by 9.65% in mean accuracy, while our EEG_GLT matrix consistently exceeded the performance of the PCC method by a mean accuracy of 13.39%. Also, we found that the construction of the adjacency matrix significantly influenced accuracy, to a greater extent than GCN model configurations. A basic GCN configuration utilising our EEG_GLT matrix exceeded the performance of even the most complex GCN setup with a PCC matrix in average accuracy. Our EEG_GLT method also reduced MACs by up to 97% compared to the PCC method, while maintaining or enhancing accuracy. In conclusion, the EEG_GLT algorithm marks a breakthrough in the development of optimal adjacency matrices, effectively boosting both computational accuracy and efficiency, making it well-suited for real-time classification of EEG MI signals that demand intensive computational resources.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (33)
  1. J. R. Wolpaw, N. Birbaumer, D. J. McFarland, G. Pfurtscheller, and T. M. Vaughan, “Brain–computer interfaces for communication and control,” Clinical Neurophysiology, vol. 113, no. 6, pp. 767–791, 2002. [Online]. Available: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1388245702000573
  2. M. A. Lebedev and M. A. Nicolelis, “Brain–machine interfaces: past, present and future,” TRENDS in Neurosciences, vol. 29, no. 9, pp. 536–546, 2006.
  3. J. Hubbard, A. Kikumoto, and U. Mayr, “Eeg decoding reveals the strength and temporal dynamics of goal-relevant representations,” Scientific reports, vol. 9, no. 1, p. 9051, 2019.
  4. D. J. McFarland, L. A. Miner, T. M. Vaughan, and J. R. Wolpaw, “Mu and beta rhythm topographies during motor imagery and actual movements,” Brain topography, vol. 12, pp. 177–186, 2000.
  5. M. Jeannerod, “The representing brain: Neural correlates of motor intention and imagery,” Behavioral and Brain sciences, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 187–202, 1994.
  6. A. Biasiucci, R. Leeb, I. Iturrate, S. Perdikis, A. Al-Khodairy, T. Corbet, A. Schnider, T. Schmidlin, H. Zhang, M. Bassolino et al., “Brain-actuated functional electrical stimulation elicits lasting arm motor recovery after stroke,” Nature communications, vol. 9, no. 1, p. 2421, 2018.
  7. C. Farabet, C. Couprie, L. Najman, and Y. LeCun, “Learning hierarchical features for scene labeling,” IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence, vol. 35, no. 8, pp. 1915–1929, 2012.
  8. Y. LeCun, L. Bottou, Y. Bengio, and P. Haffner, “Gradient-based learning applied to document recognition,” Proceedings of the IEEE, vol. 86, no. 11, pp. 2278–2324, 1998.
  9. Y. LeCun, K. Kavukcuoglu, and C. Farabet, “Convolutional networks and applications in vision,” in Proceedings of 2010 IEEE international symposium on circuits and systems.   IEEE, 2010, pp. 253–256.
  10. Z. Zhang, P. Cui, and W. Zhu, “Deep learning on graphs: A survey,” IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 249–270, 2020.
  11. Z. Wu, S. Pan, F. Chen, G. Long, C. Zhang, and S. Y. Philip, “A comprehensive survey on graph neural networks,” IEEE transactions on neural networks and learning systems, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 4–24, 2020.
  12. J. Bruna, W. Zaremba, A. Szlam, and Y. LeCun, “Spectral networks and locally connected networks on graphs,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1312.6203, 2013.
  13. M. Defferrard, X. Bresson, and P. Vandergheynst, “Convolutional neural networks on graphs with fast localized spectral filtering,” Advances in neural information processing systems, vol. 29, 2016.
  14. R. Levie, F. Monti, X. Bresson, and M. M. Bronstein, “Cayleynets: Graph convolutional neural networks with complex rational spectral filters,” IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, vol. 67, no. 1, pp. 97–109, 2018.
  15. W. Hamilton, Z. Ying, and J. Leskovec, “Inductive representation learning on large graphs,” Advances in neural information processing systems, vol. 30, 2017.
  16. F. Monti, D. Boscaini, J. Masci, E. Rodola, J. Svoboda, and M. M. Bronstein, “Geometric deep learning on graphs and manifolds using mixture model cnns,” in Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2017, pp. 5115–5124.
  17. M. Niepert, M. Ahmed, and K. Kutzkov, “Learning convolutional neural networks for graphs,” in International conference on machine learning.   PMLR, 2016, pp. 2014–2023.
  18. H. Gao, Z. Wang, and S. Ji, “Large-scale learnable graph convolutional networks,” in Proceedings of the 24th ACM SIGKDD international conference on knowledge discovery & data mining, 2018, pp. 1416–1424.
  19. G. Bao, K. Yang, L. Tong, J. Shu, R. Zhang, L. Wang, B. Yan, and Y. Zeng, “Linking multi-layer dynamical gcn with style-based recalibration cnn for eeg-based emotion recognition,” Frontiers in Neurorobotics, vol. 16, p. 834952, 2022.
  20. D. I. Shuman, S. K. Narang, P. Frossard, A. Ortega, and P. Vandergheynst, “The emerging field of signal processing on graphs: Extending high-dimensional data analysis to networks and other irregular domains,” IEEE signal processing magazine, vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 83–98, 2013.
  21. D. Zeng, K. Huang, C. Xu, H. Shen, and Z. Chen, “Hierarchy graph convolution network and tree classification for epileptic detection on electroencephalography signals,” IEEE transactions on cognitive and developmental systems, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 955–968, 2020.
  22. L. Meng, J. Hu, Y. Deng, and Y. Hu, “Electrical status epilepticus during sleep electroencephalogram waveform identification and analysis based on a graph convolutional neural network,” Biomedical Signal Processing and Control, vol. 77, p. 103788, 2022.
  23. Y. Hou, S. Jia, X. Lun, Z. Hao, Y. Shi, Y. Li, R. Zeng, and J. Lv, “Gcns-net: a graph convolutional neural network approach for decoding time-resolved eeg motor imagery signals,” IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems, 2022.
  24. R. Zhang, Z. Wang, F. Yang, and Y. Liu, “Recognizing the level of organizational commitment based on deep learning methods and eeg,” in ITM Web of Conferences, vol. 47.   EDP Sciences, 2022, p. 02044.
  25. M. Jia, W. Liu, J. Duan, L. Chen, C. Chen, Q. Wang, and Z. Zhou, “Efficient graph convolutional networks for seizure prediction using scalp eeg,” Frontiers in Neuroscience, vol. 16, p. 967116, 2022.
  26. N. Wagh and Y. Varatharajah, “Eeg-gcnn: Augmenting electroencephalogram-based neurological disease diagnosis using a domain-guided graph convolutional neural network,” in Machine Learning for Health.   PMLR, 2020, pp. 367–378.
  27. W. Ma, C. Wang, X. Sun, X. Lin, and Y. Wang, “A double-branch graph convolutional network based on individual differences weakening for motor imagery eeg classification,” Biomedical Signal Processing and Control, vol. 84, p. 104684, 2023.
  28. N. Khaleghi, T. Y. Rezaii, S. Beheshti, and S. Meshgini, “Developing an efficient functional connectivity-based geometric deep network for automatic eeg-based visual decoding,” Biomedical Signal Processing and Control, vol. 80, p. 104221, 2023.
  29. T. Song, W. Zheng, P. Song, and Z. Cui, “Eeg emotion recognition using dynamical graph convolutional neural networks,” IEEE Transactions on Affective Computing, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 532–541, 2018.
  30. T. Chen, Y. Sui, X. Chen, A. Zhang, and Z. Wang, “A unified lottery ticket hypothesis for graph neural networks,” in International conference on machine learning.   PMLR, 2021, pp. 1695–1706.
  31. A. L. Goldberger, L. A. Amaral, L. Glass, J. M. Hausdorff, P. C. Ivanov, R. G. Mark, J. E. Mietus, G. B. Moody, C.-K. Peng, and H. E. Stanley, “Physiobank, physiotoolkit, and physionet: components of a new research resource for complex physiologic signals,” circulation, vol. 101, no. 23, pp. e215–e220, 2000.
  32. S. P. van den Broek, F. Reinders, M. Donderwinkel, and M. Peters, “Volume conduction effects in eeg and meg,” Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology, vol. 106, no. 6, pp. 522–534, 1998.
  33. C. Tallon-Baudry and O. Bertrand, “Oscillatory gamma activity in humans and its role in object representation,” Trends in cognitive sciences, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 151–162, 1999.
Citations (1)
View on Semantic Scholar

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Summarize Now
X Twitter Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Tweets