Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29795611›Full record

ArticlePloS one2018

Improving the quality of a collective signal in a consumer EEG headset.

Alejandro Morán, Miguel C Soriano

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Alejandro MoránInstituto de Física Interdisciplinar y Sistemas Complejos, IFISC (CSIC-UIB), Campus Universitat Illes Balears, Palma de Mallorca, Spain.
Miguel C SorianoInstituto de Física Interdisciplinar y Sistemas Complejos, IFISC (CSIC-UIB), Campus Universitat Illes Balears, Palma de Mallorca, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-6140-8451

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This work focuses on the experimental data analysis of electroencephalography (EEG) data, in which multiple sensors are recording oscillatory voltage time series. The EEG data analyzed in this manuscript has been acquired using a low-cost commercial headset, the Emotiv EPOC+. Our goal is to compare different techniques for the optimal estimation of collective rhythms from EEG data. To this end, a traditional method such as the principal component analysis (PCA) is compared to more recent approaches to extract a collective rhythm from phase-synchronized data. Here, we extend the work by Schwabedal and Kantz (PRL 116, 104101 (2016)) evaluating the performance of the Kosambi-Hilbert torsion (KHT) method to extract a collective rhythm from multivariate oscillatory time series and compare it to results obtained from PCA. The KHT method takes advantage of the singular value decomposition algorithm and accounts for possible phase lags among different time series and allows to focus the analysis on a specific spectral band, optimally amplifying the signal-to-noise ratio of a common rhythm. We evaluate the performance of these methods for two particular sets of data: EEG data recorded with closed eyes and EEG data recorded while observing a screen flickering at 15 Hz. We found an improvement in the signal-to-noise ratio of the collective signal for the KHT over the PCA, particularly when random temporal shifts are added to the channels.

Indexed as

Signal-To-Noise RatioAlgorithmsBrain WavesElectroencephalographyHumansPrincipal Component AnalysisSignal Processing, Computer-Assisted

Identifiers

PMID29795611
PMCPMC5967739

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.