Abstract
Objective response detection (ORD) techniques such as the magnitude-squared coherence (MSC) are mathematical methods tailored to detect potentials evoked by an external periodic stimulation. The performance of the MSC is directly proportional to the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of the recorded signal and the time spent for collecting data. An alternative to increasing the performance of detection techniques without increasing data recording time is to use the information from more than one signal simultaneously. In this context, this work proposes two new detection techniques based on the average and on the product of MSCs of two different signals. The critical values and detection probabilities were obtained theoretically and using a Monte Carlo simulation. The performances of the new detectors were evaluated using synthetic data and electroencephalogram (EEG) signals during photo and auditory stimulation. For the synthetic signals, the two proposed detectors exhibited a higher detection rate when compared to the rate of the traditional MSC technique. When applied to EEG signals, these detectors resulted in an increase of the mean detection rate in relation to MSC for visual and auditory stimulation of at least 25% and 13.21%, respectively. The proposed detectors may be considered as promising tools for clinical applications.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c208b/c208bf85628dfb350b9f2a8224da28d75c2f7a2e" alt=""
Graphical Abstract
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/a1e55/a1e55a814ff52038ff05824165e9818f4248e794" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/f0437/f043715ac02a33a3b979604b0f3d430d4ed2f0c7" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/118de/118de102e50f60b34d6cd45adf1c15ee62f3bf1d" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/034b5/034b5bc608891e091ab3018960139d9682c37264" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/0daf6/0daf6e8e324aaff4b4d9d8c7a538f48902e5b5d0" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/51158/51158587cf432f12902e1c0ab975d13547fdcf49" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/fcd53/fcd5334547110245d6fd575916a9516e9b506e88" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/39f21/39f215530745665ef1b8f56f67bbc1b70d0e80fe" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/ef775/ef775f16d4510e51c45301f11835f885941ab97f" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/eab86/eab86002204cfe79f4c339bf0c86f4221cfb277b" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/972b4/972b4553205a222fdd650ae6c6cb666b55632cc9" alt=""
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Regan D (1989) Human brain electrophysiology. Evoked potentials and evoked magnetic fields in science and medicine. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 73:84. https://doi.org/10.1016/0013-4694(89)90022-9
Palaniappan R (2010) Biological signal analysis. Ventus Publishing, Denmark
Dobie RA, Wilson MJ (1989) Analysis of auditory evoked potentials by magnitude-squared coherence. Ear Hear 10:2–13. https://doi.org/10.1097/00003446-198902000-00002
Fridman J, Zappulla R, Bergelson M, Greenblatt E, Mails L, Morrell F, Hoeppner T (1984) Application of phase spectral analysis for brain stem auditory evoked potential detection in normal subjects and patients with posterior fossa tumors. Int J Audiol 23:99–113. https://doi.org/10.3109/00206098409072825
Fisher RA (1929) Tests of significance in harmonic analysis. Proc R Soc London, Ser A 125:54–59. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.1929.0151
Mijares E, Pérez Abalo MC, Herrera D, Lage A, Vega M (2013) Comparing statistics for objective detection of transient and steady-state evoked responses in newborns. Int J Audiol 52:44–49. https://doi.org/10.3109/14992027.2012.736030
Vanheusden FJ, Bell SL, Chesnaye MA, Simpson DM (2019) Improved detection of vowel envelope frequency following responses using Hotelling’s T 2 analysis. Ear Hear 40:116–127. https://doi.org/10.1097/AUD.0000000000000598
Cebulla M, Stürzebecher E, Elberling C (2006) Objective detection of auditory steady-state responses: comparison of one-sample and q-sample tests. J Am Acad Audiol 17:93–103. https://doi.org/10.3766/jaaa.17.2.3
Dobie RA (1993) Objective response detection. Ear Hear 14:31–35. https://doi.org/10.1097/00003446-199302000-00005
Kay SM (1998) Fundamentals of statistical signal processing, volume 2: detection theory. Signal Process II:672
Sininger YS, Hunter LL, Hayes D, Roush PA, Uhler KM (2018) Evaluation of speed and accuracy of next-generation auditory steady state response and auditory brainstem response audiometry in children with normal hearing and hearing loss. Ear Hear 39:1–1223. https://doi.org/10.1097/AUD.0000000000000580
Felix LB, Rocha PFF, Mendes EMAM, Miranda de Sá AMFL (2018) Multivariate approach for estimating the local spectral F-test and its application to the EEG during photic stimulation. Comput Methods Prog Biomed 162:87–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmpb.2018.05.010
Felix LB, Miranda De Sá AMFL, Infantosi AFC, Yehia HC (2007) Multivariate objective response detectors (MORD): statistical tools for multichannel EEG analysis during rhythmic stimulation. Ann Biomed Eng 35:443–452. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10439-006-9231-4
Miranda de Sá AMFL, Felix LB, Infantosi AFC (2004) A matrix-based algorithm for estimating multiple coherence of a periodic signal and its application to the multichannel EEG during sensory stimulation. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 51:1140–1146. https://doi.org/10.1109/TBME.2004.827952
Malekpour S, Gubner JA, Sethares WA (2018) Measures of generalized magnitude-squared coherence: differences and similarities. J Frankl Inst 355:2932–2950. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfranklin.2018.01.014
Rocha PFF, Felix LB, Miranda de Sá AMFL, Mendes EMAM (2016) Multivariate evoked response detection based on the spectral F-test. J Neurosci Methods 264:113–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneumeth.2016.03.005
Van Dun B, Wouters J, Moonen M (2007) Improving auditory steady-state response detection using independent component analysis on multichannel EEG data. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 54:1220–1230. https://doi.org/10.1109/TBME.2007.897327
Van Dun B, Wouters J, Moonen M (2009) Optimal electrode selection for multi-channel electroencephalogram based detection of auditory steady-state responses. J Acoust Soc Am 126:254–268. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.3133872
Heinrich SP (2009) Permutation-based significance tests for multiharmonic steady-state evoked potentials. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 56:534–537. https://doi.org/10.1109/TBME.2008.2006021
Bharadwaj HM, Shinn-Cunningham BG (2014) Rapid acquisition of auditory subcortical steady state responses using multichannel recordings. Clin Neurophysiol 125:1878–1888. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinph.2014.01.011
Almurshedi A, Ismail AK (2014) Cross coherence independent component analysis in resting and action states EEG discrimination. J Phys Conf Ser 546:012019. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/546/1/012019
Guo M, Xu G, Wang L, Masters M, Milsap G, Thakor N, Soares AB (2015) The anterior contralateral response improves performance in a single trial auditory oddball BMI. Biomed Signal Process Control 22:74–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bspc.2015.06.014
Seraj E, Sameni R (2017) Robust electroencephalogram phase estimation with applications in brain-computer interface systems. Physiol Meas 38:501–523. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6579/aa5bba
Kaongoen N, Jo S (2017) A novel hybrid auditory BCI paradigm combining ASSR and P300. J Neurosci Methods 279:44–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneumeth.2017.01.011
Souza AP, Soares QB, Felix LB, Mendes EMAM (2018) Classification of auditory selective attention using spatial coherence and modular attention index. Comput Methods Prog Biomed 166:107–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmpb.2018.10.002
Felix LB, Antunes F, da Carvalho JAS et al (2018) Comparison of univariate and multivariate magnitude-squared coherences in the detection of human 40-Hz auditory steady-state evoked responses. Biomed Signal Process Control 40:234–239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bspc.2017.09.024
da Eloi BFS, Antunes F, Felix LB (2018) Improving the detection of auditory steady-state responses near 80 Hz using multiple magnitude-squared coherence and multichannel electroencephalogram. Biomed Signal Process Control 42:158–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bspc.2018.01.017
Dobie RA, Wilson MJ (1993) Objective response detection in the frequency domain. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol Evoked Potentials 88:516–524. https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-5597(93)90040-V
Dobie RA, Wilson MJ (1994) Objective detection of 40 Hz auditory evoked potentials: phase coherence vs. magnitude-squared coherence. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol Evoked Potentials 92:405–413. https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-5597(94)90017-5
Stürzebecher E, Cebulla M, Wernecke KD (2001) Objective detection of transiently evoked otoacoustic emissions. Scand Audiol 30:78–88. https://doi.org/10.1080/010503901300112185
Wianda E, Ross B (2016) Detecting neuromagnetic synchrony in the presence of noise. J Neurosci Methods 262:41–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneumeth.2016.01.012
Santos TS, Silva JJ, Lins OG, Melges DB, Tierra-Criollo CJ (2016) Detection efficiency of auditory steady state evoked by modulated noise. Hear Res 339:125–131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heares.2016.05.017
Miranda de Sá AMFL, Ferreira DD, Dias EW, Mendes EMAM, Felix LB (2009) Coherence estimate between a random and a periodic signal: Bias, variance, analytical critical values, and normalizing transforms. J Frankl Inst 346:841–853. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfranklin.2009.07.009
Shah AS, Bressler SL, Knuth KH, Ding M, Mehta AD, Ulbert I, Schroeder CE (2004) Neural dynamics and the fundamental mechanisms of event-related brain potentials. Cereb Cortex 14:476–483. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhh009
Miranda de Sá AMFL (2004) A note on the sampling distribution of coherence estimate for the detection of periodic signals. IEEE Signal Process Lett 11:323–325. https://doi.org/10.1109/LSP.2003.821751
Santos Filho SA, Tierra-Criollo CJ, Souza AP, Silva Pinto MA, Cunha Lima ML, Manzano GM (2009) Magnitude squared of coherence to detect imaginary movement. EURASIP J Adv Signal Process 2009:2009. https://doi.org/10.1155/2009/534536
Miranda de Sá AMFL, Felix LB (2002) Improving the detection of evoked responses to periodic stimulation by using multiple coherence – application during photic stimulation. Med Eng Phys 24:245–252
Nadarajah S (2006) Sums, products and ratios of generalized beta variables. Stat Pap 47:69–90. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00362-005-0273-8
Nadarajah S (2009) Reply to comments on “Sums, Products, and Ratios of Non-Central Beta Variables” by Saralees Nadarajah by Antonio Mauricio F. L. Miranda de Sa, Leonardo B. Felix, and Eduardo M. A. M. Mendes. Commun Stat - Theory Methods 38:2428–2433. https://doi.org/10.1080/03610920802562756
Nadarajah S (2005) Sums, products, and ratios of non-central beta variables. Commun Stat - Theory Methods 34:89–100. https://doi.org/10.1081/STA-200045865
Papoulis A (1991) Probability, random variables and stochastic processes. Book 678:378. https://doi.org/10.2307/1266379
Lins OG, Picton TW (1995) Auditory steady-state responses to multiple simultaneous stimuli. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol Potentials Sect 96:420–432. https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-5597(95)00048-W
John MS, Picton TW (2000) MASTER: a Windows program for recording multiple auditory steady-state responses. Comput Methods Prog Biomed 61:125–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-5597(95)00048-W
Picciotti PM, Giannantonio S, Paludetti G, Conti G (2013) Steady state auditory evoked potentials in normal hearing subjects: evaluation of threshold and testing time. Orl 74:310–314. https://doi.org/10.1159/000345497
Hatton JL, Stapells DR (2013) Monotic versus dichotic multiple-stimulus auditory steady state responses in young children. Ear Hear 34:680–682. https://doi.org/10.1097/AUD.0b013e31828d2c1d
Acknowledgments
This study was financed in part by the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior - Brazil (CAPES) - Finance Code 001, CNPq, FAPEMIG, and FAPERJ.
Funding
FAPEMIG, FAPERJ, CNPq, CAPES.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
The local Ethics Committees IFF-FIOCRUZ/MS and CEP/UFV(1.616.098) approved this research, and all volunteers gave written informed consent to participate.
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Glossary
- κ A(f)
-
Average coherence
- ASSR
-
Auditory steady-state response
- CSM
-
Component synchrony measure
- DR
-
Detection rate
- EEG
-
Electroencephalogram
- EP
-
Evoked potential
- FP
-
False positives
- H 0
-
Null hypothesis
- MORD
-
Multivariate objective response detectors
- MSC
-
Magnitude-squared coherence
- NDR
-
Number of detected responses
- NT
-
Number of tests
- ORD
-
Objective response detection
-
Probability density function
- PD
-
Probability of detecting
- κ P(f)
-
Product coherence
- SNR
-
Signal-to-noise
- SFT
-
Spectral F-test (SFT)
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Zanotelli, T., Leite Miranda de Sá, A.M.F., Mendes, E.M.A.M. et al. Improving the power of objective response detection of evoked responses in noise by using average and product of magnitude-squared coherence of two different signals. Med Biol Eng Comput 57, 2203–2214 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11517-019-02020-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11517-019-02020-y