Skip to content Skip to navigation
University of Warwick
  • Study
  • |
  • Research
  • |
  • Business
  • |
  • Alumni
  • |
  • News
  • |
  • About

University of Warwick
Publications service & WRAP

Highlight your research

  • WRAP
    • Home
    • Search WRAP
    • Browse by Warwick Author
    • Browse WRAP by Year
    • Browse WRAP by Subject
    • Browse WRAP by Department
    • Browse WRAP by Funder
    • Browse Theses by Department
  • Publications Service
    • Home
    • Search Publications Service
    • Browse by Warwick Author
    • Browse Publications service by Year
    • Browse Publications service by Subject
    • Browse Publications service by Department
    • Browse Publications service by Funder
  • Statistics
  • Help & Advice
University of Warwick

The Library

  • Login

Independent component analysis for auditory evoked potentials and cochlear implant artifact estimation

Tools
- Tools
+ Tools

Castañeda-Villa, N. and James, C. J.. (2011) Independent component analysis for auditory evoked potentials and cochlear implant artifact estimation. IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering, Vol.58 (No.2). pp. 348-354. ISSN 0018-9294

Full text not available from this repository.
Official URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TBME.2010.2072957

Abstract

Auditory evoked potential (AEP) recordings have been analyzed through independent component analysis (ICA) in the literature; however, the performance varies depending on the ICA algorithms used. There are very few studies that concentrate on the optimum parameter selection for estimating the AEP components reliably, while also recovering the specific artifact generated with the normal functioning of a cochlear implant (CI). The objective of this research is to determine which ICA algorithm, high-order statistics (HOS)-based or second-order statistic (SOS)-based, is more plausible to remove this artifact and estimate the AEP. The optimal parameters of three such ICA algorithms for estimating the components from a database of recordings were determined, and then the estimates for the AEP and CI artifact were compared using each method. All the algorithms estimate the CI artifact reasonably well, although only one SOS algorithm is better positioned to estimate the AEP; this is primarily because it uses the temporal structure of this signal as part of the ICA process.

Item Type: Journal Article
Divisions: Faculty of Science > WMG (Formerly the Warwick Manufacturing Group)
Journal or Publication Title: IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering
Publisher: IEEE
ISSN: 0018-9294
Date: 2011
Volume: Vol.58
Number: No.2
Page Range: pp. 348-354
Identification Number: 10.1109/TBME.2010.2072957
Status: Peer Reviewed
Publication Status: Published
URI: http://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/id/eprint/41466

Data sourced from Thomson Reuters' Web of Knowledge

Request changes to a record

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item
twitter

Email us: publications@warwick.ac.uk
Contact Details
About Us