Abstract
We present a study of linear, quadratic and regularized discriminant analysis (RDA) applied to motor imagery data of three subjects. The aim of the work was to find out which classifier can separate better these two-class motor imagery data: linear, quadratic or some function in between the linear and quadratic solutions. Discriminant analysis methods were tested with two different feature extraction techniques, adaptive autoregressive parameters and logarithmic band power estimates, which are commonly used in brain–computer interface research. Differences in classification accuracy of the classifiers were found when using different amounts of data; if a small amount was available, the best classifier was linear discriminant analysis (LDA) and if enough data were available all three classifiers performed very similar. This suggests that the effort needed to find regularizing parameters for RDA can be avoided by using LDA.





Similar content being viewed by others
References
Birbaumer N, Ghanayim N, Hinterberger T, Iversen I, Kotchoubey B, Kübler A, Perelmouter J, Taub E, Flor H (1999) A brain-controlled spelling device for the completely paralyzed. Nature 398:297–298
Blankertz B, Curio G, Müller KR (2002) Classifying single trial EEG: towards brain computer interfacing. In: Diettrich TG, Becker S, Ghahramani Z (eds) Advances in neural information processing systems 14. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 157–164
Millán J del R, Mourino J (2003) Asynchronous BCI and local neural classifiers: an overview of the adaptive brain interface project. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 11(2):159–161
Duda O, Hart PE, Stork DG (2001) Pattern classification, 2nd edn. Wiley Interscience, New York
Friedman JH (1989) Regularized discriminant analysis. J Am Stat Assoc 84(405):165–175
Garrett D, Peterson DA, Anderson CW, Thaut MH (2003) Comparison of linear, nonlinear, and feature selection methods for EEG signal classification. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 11(2):141–144
Guger C, Schlögl A, Neuper C, Walterspacher C, Strein D, Pfurtscheller T, Pfurtscheller G (2001) Rapid prototyping of an EEG-based brain–computer interface (BCI). IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 9:49–58
Haselsteiner E, Pfurtscheller G (2000) Using time-dependent neural networks for EEG classification. IEEE Trans Rehabil Eng 8(4):457–463
Krausz G, Scherer R, Korisek G, Pfurtscheller G (2003) Critical decision-speed and information transfer in the ‘graz brain–computer interface’. Appl Psychophysiol Biofeedback 28:233–240
Mika S, Raetsch G, Weston J, Schölkopf B, Müller KR (1999) Fisher discriminant analysis with kernels. In: Hu YH, Larsen J, Wilson E, Douglas S (eds) Neural Networks for Signal Processing IX. IEEE, Piscataway, pp 41–48
Müller KR, Anderson CW, Birch GE (2003) Linear and non-linear methods for brain–computer interfaces. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 11:165–169
Neuper C, Schlögl A, Pfurtscheller G (2000) Enhancement of left-right sensorimotor EEG differences during feedback-regulated motor imagery. J Clin Neurophysiol 16:373–382
Neuper C, Müller GR, Kübler A, Birbaumer N, Pfurtscheller G (2003) Clinical application of an EEG-based brain–computer interface: a case study in a patient with severe motor impairment. Clin Neurophysiol 114(3):399–409
Obermaier B, Guger C, Neuper C, Pfurtscheller G (2001) Hidden markov models for online classification of single trial eeg data. Pattern Recognit Lett 22:1299–1309
Obermaier B, Müller G, Pfurtscheller G (2003) ‘Virtual keyboard’ controlled by spontaneous EEG activity. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 11(4):422–426
Pfurtscheller G, Neuper C (1997) Motor imagery activates primary sensorimotor area in humans. Neurosci Lett 239:65–68
Pfurtscheller G, Neuper C (2001) Motor imagery and direct brain–computer communications. Proc IEEE 89:1123–1134
Pfurtscheller G, Neuper C, Flotzinger D, Pregenzer M (1997) EEG-based discrimination between imagination of right and left hand movement. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 103:642–651
Pfurtscheller G, Neuper C, Schlögl A, Luger K (1998) Separability of EEG signals recorded during right and left motor imagery using adaptive autoregressive parameters. IEEE Trans Rehabil Eng 6(3):316–325
Pfurtscheller G, Neuper C, Guger C, Harkam W, Ramoser H, Schlögl A, Obermaier B, Pregenzer M (2000) Current trends in graz brain–computer interface (BCI) research. IEEE Trans Rehabil Eng 8:216–219
Pfurtscheller G, Neuper C, Müller G, Obermaier B, Krausz G, Schlögl A, Scherer R, Graimann B, Keinrath C, Skliris D, Woertz M, Supp G, Schrank C (2003) Graz-BCI: state of the art and clinical applications. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 11:177–180
Scherer R, Müller-Putz G, Neuper C, Graimann B, Pfurtscheller G (2004) An asynchronously controlled EEG-based virtual keyboard: improvement of the spelling rate. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 51(6):979–984
Schlögl A (2000) The electroencephalogram and the adaptive autoregressive model: theory and applications. Shaker Verlag, Aachen
Schlögl A (2005) The biosig project. 2003–2004. http://www.biosig.sf.net/
Schlögl A, Flotzinger D, Pfurtscheller G (1997) Adaptive autoregressive modeling used for single-trial EEG classification. Biomed Tech 42:162–167
Wolpaw JR, Birbaumer N, McFarland DJ, Pfurtscheller G, Vaughan TM (2002) Brain–computer interfaces for communication and control. Clin Neurophysiol 113:767–791
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank our reviewers for their interest and useful comments. This work was supported by the Spanish Ministry of Culture and Education (Grant Ref.: AP-2000-4673), by the Lorenz Böhler Gesellschaft in Austria and by “Fonds zur Förderung der wissenschaftlichen Forschung” in Austria, project 16326-BO2.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Vidaurre, C., Scherer, R., Cabeza, R. et al. Study of discriminant analysis applied to motor imagery bipolar data. Med Bio Eng Comput 45, 61–68 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11517-006-0122-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11517-006-0122-5