logo资料库

A_Novel_Feature_Extraction_forRobust_EMG_Pattern_Recognition___..pdf

第1页 / 共10页
第2页 / 共10页
第3页 / 共10页
第4页 / 共10页
第5页 / 共10页
第6页 / 共10页
第7页 / 共10页
第8页 / 共10页
资料共10页,剩余部分请下载后查看
JOURNAL OF COMPUTING, VOLUME 1, ISSUE 1, DECEMBER 2009, ISSN: 2151-9617 HTTPS://SITES.GOOGLE.COM/SITE/JOURNALOFCOMPUTING/ A Novel Feature Extraction for Robust EMG Pattern Recognition Angkoon Phinyomark, Chusak Limsakul, and Pornchai Phukpattaranont 71 Abstract—Varieties of noises are major problem in recognition of Electromyography (EMG) signal. Hence, methods to remove noise become most significant in EMG signal analysis. White Gaussian noise (WGN) is used to represent interference in this paper. Generally, WGN is difficult to be removed using typical filtering and solutions to remove WGN are limited. In addition, noise removal is an important step before performing feature extraction, which is used in EMG-based recognition. This research is aimed to present a novel feature that tolerate with WGN. As a result, noise removal algorithm is not needed. Two novel mean and median frequencies (MMNF and MMDF) are presented for robust feature extraction. Sixteen existing features and two novelties are evaluated in a noisy environment. WGN with various signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs), i.e. 20-0 dB, was added to the original EMG signal. The results showed that MMNF performed very well especially in weak EMG signal compared with others. The error of MMNF in weak EMG signal with very high noise, 0 dB SNR, is about 5-10% and closed by MMDF and Histogram, whereas the error of other features is more than 20%. While in strong EMG signal, the error of MMNF is better than those from other features. Moreover, the combination of MMNF, Histrogram of EMG and Willison amplitude is used as feature vector in classification task. The experimental result shows the better recognition result in noisy environment than other success feature candidates. From the above results demonstrate that MMNF can be used for new robust feature extraction. Index Terms—Electromyography (EMG), Feature extraction, Pattern recognition, Robustness, Man-machine interfaces. —————————— —————————— 1 INTRODUCTION S URFACE Electromyography (sEMG) signal is one of the electrophysiological signals, which is extensively studied and applied in clinic and engineering. In this research, the application of sEMG signal in assistive tech- nology and rehabilitation engineering is paid attention. Main application of these fields is the control of the pros- thesis or other assistive devices using the different pat- terns of sEMG signal [1-2]. Nevertheless, the major draw- back of EMG pattern recognition is the poor recognition results under conditions of existing noises especially when the frequency characteristic of noise is random. Ma- jor types of noise, artefact and interference in recorded sEMG signal are electrode noise, electrode and cable mo- tion artifact, alternating current power line interference, and other noise sources such as a broad band noise from electronic instrument [3-4]. The first three types of noise can be removed using typical filtering procedures such as band-pass filter, band-stop filter, or the use of well elec- trode and instrument [3-4] but the interferences of ran- dom noise that fall in EMG dominant frequency energy is difficult to be removed using previous procedures. Gen- erally, white Gaussian noise (WGN) is used to represent ———————————————— • Angkoon Phinyomark is with Department of Electrical Engineering, Prince of Songkla University, Songkhla, Thailand 90112. • Chusak Limsakul is with the Department of Electrical Engineering, Prince of Songkla University, Songkhla, Thailand 90112. • Pornchai Phukpattaranont is with the Department of Electrical Engi- neering, Prince of Songkla University, Songkhla, Thailand 90112. the random noise in sEMG signal analysis [5-6]. Adaptive filter or wavelet denoising algorithm, advance digital sig- nal filter, has been received considerable attention in the removal of WGN [7-8]. However, WGN cannot be re- moved one hundred percent and sometimes some impor- tant part of sEMG signals are removed with noise even if we use adaptive filter and wavelet denoising algorithm. The broad band and random frequency characteristic of noise in this group is a main reason that make it difficult to be removed. Moreover, the amplitude of noise is bigger than the sEMG signal amplitude; the amplitude of raw signal is about 50 µV-100 mV [9]. In EMG-based pattern recognition, sEMG signal is preprocessed the spectral frequency component of the signal and extracted some features before performing classification [1]. Normally, in preprocessing and signal condition procedure, method to remove noise is a signifi- cant step to reduce noises and improve some spectral component part [3]. Next important step, feature extrac- tion, is used for highlighting the relevant structures in the sEMG signal and rejecting noise and unimportant sEMG signal [5]. The success of EMG pattern recognition de- pends on the selection of features that represent raw sEMG signal for classification. This study is motivated by the fact that the limitation of the solutions to remove WGN in the preprocessing step and EMG-based gestures classification need to do the extraction step. The selection of feature that torelance of WGN and the modified of ex- isting EMG feature to improve the robust property are proposed. As a result, WGN removal algorithms in the preprocessing step are not needed. © 2009 Journal of Computing http://sites.google.com/site/journalofcomputing/
JOURNAL OF COMPUTING, VOLUME 1, ISSUE 1, DECEMBER 2009, ISSN: 2151-9617 HTTPS://SITES.GOOGLE.COM/SITE/JOURNALOFCOMPUTING/ 72 Fig. 1. Estimated six upper limb motions (a) wrist flexion (b) wrist extension (c) hand close (d) hand open (e) forearm pronation (d) forearm supination. From the literatures, the development of robust feature extractions in speech, texture, and image are presented [10-11] but there is no selection and modification of ro- bust EMG feature extraction. There are some evaluations about the effect of noise with EMG features [5, 12-14]. However, these literatures attend to the quality of EMG features in maximum class separability point of view. The description and discussion about the robustness are infe- riority. Furthermore, features that used to evaluate in the literatures are not fair with the available methods today. In 1995, Zardoshti-Kermani et al. [5] evaluated seven fea- tures in time domain and frequency domain. WGN with 0 to 50% of rms amplitude signal are used to test the effect of noise. The cluster separability index and classification result are presented that histrogram of EMG is the better feature in very high noise (50% of rms amplitude signal). Later, in 2003, thirteen features with combination and various orders are tested the robustness property by Boostani et al. [12]. One level, one tenth of sEMG peak-to- peak amplitude, of 50 Hz interference and random noise is considered and the sensitivity of feature is reported. In addition, our previous work [13-14] compared the effect of eight features and their relevant features with 50 Hz interference and WGN. The results of mean square error (MSE) criterion show that Willison amplitude with 5 mV threshold parameter is the best feature compared to the other features. However, there is an increase in EMG feature methods that is published in many literatures this day. In this pa- per, sixteen features in time domain and frequency do- main from the literatures [5, 12-17] are used to test the robustness with the additive WGN at various signal-to- noise ratios (SNRs). Moreover, the effect of the level of signal amplitude was tested. Eighteen features that used in this research represent most features in EMG pattern recognition. Generally, most of the attempts to extract features from sEMG signal can be classified into three categories including time domain, frequency domain, and time-frequency domain [1]. We considered only former two categories because they have computational simplici- ty and they have been widely used in research and in Fig. 2. Strong sEMG signal (gray line) and weak sEMG signal (black line) of (a) wrist extension motion. (b) hand open motion. clinical practice. In addition, two novel feature calcula- tions using frequency properties are presented. We mod- ified the mean frequency and median frequency by calcu- lating the mean and median of amplitude spectrum in- stead of power spectrum that we called Modifed Mean Frequency (MMNF) and Modified Median Frequency (MMDF). This paper is organized as follows. Experiments and data acquisition are presented in Section 2. Section 3 presents a description of EMG feature extraction methods in time domain and frequency domain. In addition, the evaluation criterion is introduced. Results and discussion are reported in Section 4, and finally the conclusion is drawn in Section 5. 2 EXPERIMENTS AND DATA ACQUISITION In this section, we depict our experimental procedure for recording sEMG signals. The sEMG signal was recorded from flexor carpi radialis and extensor carpi radialis lon- gus of a healthy male by two pairs of Ag-AgCl Red Dot surface electrodes on the right forearm. Each electrode was separated from the other by 2 cm. A band-pass filter of 10-500 Hz bandwidth and an amplifier with 60 dB gain was used. Sampling frequency was set at 1 kHz using a 16 bit analog-to-digital converter board (National Instru- ments, DAQCard-6024E). A volunteer performed four upper limb motions in- cluding hand open, hand close, wrist extension, and wrist flexion as shown in Fig. 1 (a-d). In this study, the effect of signal strength was performed by divided the sEMG sig- nal to two types: strong sEMG signal and weak sEMG signal. Strong sEMG signals were collected from extensor carpi radialis longus in hand close and wrist flexion and
JOURNAL OF COMPUTING, VOLUME 1, ISSUE 1, DECEMBER 2009, ISSN: 2151-9617 HTTPS://SITES.GOOGLE.COM/SITE/JOURNALOFCOMPUTING/ 73 Fig. 3. The eight electrode placements of the right forearm. were collected from flexor carpi radialis in hand open and wrist extension as shown in Fig. 2 (gray line). In addition, the others motion and electrode channel are weak sEMG signals as shown in Fig. 2 (black line). Ten datasets were collected for each motion. The sample size of the sEMG signals is 256 ms for the real-time constraint that the re- sponse time should be less than 300 ms. This dataset was used for the MSE criterion that represent the effect of noise with the value of EMG features. The second dataset is used to evaluate the performance of the classification results of EMG features in noisy envi- ronment. Seven upper limb motions including hand open, hand close, wrist extension, wrist flexion, forearm prona- tion, forearm supination and resting as shown in Fig. 1 and eight electrode positions on the right forearm as shown in Fig. 3 were used in the classification procedure to measure the performance of the EMG feature space quality with WGN. This dataset was acquired by the Car- leton University in Canada [17]. A duo-trode Ag-AgCl surface electrode (Myotronics, 6140) was used and an Ag- AgCl Red-Dot surface electrode (3M, 2237) was placed on the wrist to provide a common ground reference. This system set a bandpass filter with a 1–1000 Hz bandwidth and amplifier with a 60 dB (Model 15, Grass Telefactor). The sEMG signals were sampled by using an analog-to- digital converter board (National Instruments, PCI- 6071E), and the sampling frequency was 3 kHz. However, in pattern recognition, downsample of EMG data from 3 kHz to 1 kHz was done. Each trial of the database con- sisted of four repetitions of each motion. There are six trials in each subject. Three subjects were selected in this study. More details of experimentals and data acquisition are described in [17]. 3 METHODOLOGY Eighteen time domain features and frequency domain features are described in this section. Thirteen time do- main variables are measured as a function of time. Be- cause of their computational simplicity, time domain fea- tures or linear techniques are the most popular in EMG pattern recognition. Integrated EMG, Mean absolute val- ue, Modified mean absolute value 1, Modified mean abso- lute value 2, Mean absolute value slope, Simple square integral, Variance of EMG, Root mean square, Waveform length, Zero crossing, Slope sign change, Willison ampli- tude, and Histogram of EMG are used to test the perfor- mance. All of them can be done in real-time and electron- ically and it is simple for implementation. Features in this group are normally used for onset detection, muscle con- traction and muscle activity detection. Moreover, features in frequency domain are used to represent the detect muscle fatigue and neural abnormalities, and sometime are used in EMG pattern recognition. Three traditional and two modified features in frequency spectrum are per- formed namely autoregressive coefficients, mean and median frequencies, modified mean and median frequen- cies. Afterward, the evaluation methods of two criterions that used to measure the robustness property of the whole features are introduced. 3.1 Time Domain Feature Extraction 3.1.1 Integrated EMG Integrated EMG (IEMG) is calculated as the summation of the absolute values of the sEMG signal amplitude. Gener- ally, IEMG is used as an onset index to detect the muscle activity that used to oncoming the control command of assistive control device. It is related to the sEMG signal sequence firing point, which can be expressed as IEMG N = ∑ , x n n = 1 (1) where N denotes the length of the signal and xn represents the sEMG signal in a segment. 3.1.2 Mean Absolute Value Mean Absolute Value (MAV) is similar to average recti- fied value (ARV). It can be calculated using the moving average of full-wave rectified EMG. In other words, it is calculated by taking the average of the absolute value of sEMG signal. It is an easy way for detection of muscle contraction levels and it is a popular feature used in myoelectric control application. It is defined as MAV 1 N = ∑ . N = n x n 1 (2) 3.1.3 Modified Mean Absolute Value 1 Modified Mean Absolute Value 1 (MMAV1) is an exten- sion of MAV using weighting window function wn. It is shown as MMAV1 = 1 N N ∑ n = 1 w x n n , w n { = 0.25 1, 0.5, if N n 0.75 ≤ ≤ otherwise . N (3) 3.1.4 Modified Mean Absolute Value 2 Modified Mean Absolute Value 2 (MMAV2) is similar to MMAV1. However, the smooth window is improved in this method using continuous weighting window function wn. It is given by MMAV2 = 1 N ∑ N = n 1 w x n n , (4)
JOURNAL OF COMPUTING, VOLUME 1, ISSUE 1, DECEMBER 2009, ISSN: 2151-9617 HTTPS://SITES.GOOGLE.COM/SITE/JOURNALOFCOMPUTING/ 74 if 1, 0.25 n N if 4 / , 0.25 n N N if ) / , 0.75 N n N 0.75 ≤ ≤ N n > N n < − . w n { = 4( 3.1.5 Mean Absolute Value Slope Mean Absolute Value Slope (MAVSLP) is a modified ver- sion of MAV. The differences between the MAVs of adja- cent segments are determined. The equation can be de- fined as presented in Section 4.1. 3.1.10 Zero Crossing Zero crossing (ZC) is the number of times that the ampli- tude value of sEMG signal crosses the zero y-axis. In EMG feature, the threshold condition is used to abstain from the background noise. This feature provides an ap- proximate estimation of frequency domain properties. It can be formulated as MAVSLP =MAV ‐MAV . i+1 i i (5) ZC = 3.1.6 Simple Square Integral Simple Square Integral (SSI) uses the energy of the sEMG signal as a feature. It can be expressed as SSI N 2 = ∑ . x n n = 1 (6) 3.1.7 Variance of EMG Variance of EMG (VAR) uses the power of the sEMG sig- nal as a feature. Generally, the variance is the mean value of the square of the deviation of that variable. However, mean of EMG signal is close to zero. In consequence, va- riance of EMG can be calculated by N − 1 ∑ n = 1 sgn ⎡ ⎣ ( x n × x n + 1 ) ∩ − x n x n + 1 ≥ threshold ⎤ ; ⎦ x sgn( ) { = 1, 0, if x ≥ otherwise threshold . (10) 3.1.11 Slope Sign Change Slope Sign Change (SSC) is similar to ZC. It is another method to represent the frequency information of sEMG signal. The number of changes between positive and neg- ative slope among three consecutive segments are per- formed with the threshold function for avoiding the inter- ference in sEMG signal. The calculation is defined as SSC = N − 1 ∑ n = 2 f ⎡ ⎣ ( ⎡ ⎣ x n − x n − 1 ) × ( x n − x n + 1 ) ⎤ ⎦ ⎤ ; ⎦ (11) VAR = N N 1 − ∑ . 1 x 2 n = n 1 (7) f x ( ) { = 1, 0, if x ≥ otherwise threshold . 3.1.8 Root Mean Square Root Mean Square (RMS) is modeled as amplitude mod- ulated Gaussian random process whose RMS is related to the constant force and non-fatiguing contraction. It relates to standard deviation, which can be expressed as RMS = ∑ . x 2 n 1 N N = n 1 3.1.12 Willison Amplitude Willison amplitude (WAMP) is the number of times that the difference between sEMG signal amplitude among two adjacent segments that exceeds a predefined thre- shold to reduce noise effects same as ZC and SSC. The definition is as (8) WAMP = ( f x n − x n + 1 ) ; N − 1 ∑ n = 1 in  the  literatures  The  comparison  between  RMS  and  MAV  feature  is  reported  [3,  18].  Clancy  et  al.  experimentally found that the processing of MAV feature  is equal to or better in theory and experiment than RMS  processing.  Furthermore,  the  measured  index  of  power  property that remained in RMS feature is more advantage  than MAV feature.      3.1.9 Waveform Length Waveform length (WL) is the cumulative length of the waveform over the time segment. WL is related to the waveform amplitude, frequency and time. It is given by WL = N − 1 −∑ x n + 1 n = 1 x n . (9) All  of  these  features  above,  3.1.1‐3.1.9,  are  computed  based on sEMG signal amplitude. From the experimental  results, the pattern of these features is similar. Hence, we  selected  the  robust  feature  representing  for  the  other  features  in  this  group.  The  results  and  discussion  is  f x ( ) { = 1, 0, if x ≥ otherwise threshold . (12) WAMP is related to the firing of motor unit action po- tentials (MUAP) and the muscle contraction level. The suitable value of threshold parameter of features in ZC, SSC, and WAMP is normally chosen between 10 and 100 mV that is dependent on the setting of gain value of instrument. Nevertheless, the optimal threshold that suitable for robustness in sEMG signal analysis is eva- luated and discussed in Section 4.1. 3.1.13 Histogram of EMG Histogram of EMG (HEMG) divides the elements in sEMG signal into b equally spaced segments and returns the number of elements in each segment. HEMG is an extension version of the ZC and WAMP features. The effect of various segments is tested and expressed in Sec- tion 4.1.
JOURNAL OF COMPUTING, VOLUME 1, ISSUE 1, DECEMBER 2009, ISSN: 2151-9617 HTTPS://SITES.GOOGLE.COM/SITE/JOURNALOFCOMPUTING/ 75 Fig. 5. Original sEMG (gray line) signal and noisy sEMG signal at 5 dB SNR (black line) in six upper limb motions. Modified Mean Frequency (MMNF) is the average fre- quency. MMNF is calculated as the sum of the product of the amplitude spectrum and the frequency, divided by the total sum of spectrum intensity, as in Fig. 4. Power spectrum (×10-5) (top) and amplitude spectrum (×10-3) (bottom) of noisy sEMG signal at 20 dB SNR in hand close motion. 3.2 Frequency Domain Feature Extraction 3.2.1 Autoregressive Coefficients Autoregressive (AR) model described each sample of sEMG signal as a linear combination of previous samples plus a white noise error term. AR coefficients are used as features in EMG pattern recognition. The model is basi- cally of the following form: x n = − p ∑ i 1 = a x i n i w− n + , (13) where xn is a sample of the model signal, αi is AR coeffi- cients, wn is white noise or error sequence, and p is the order of AR model. The forth order AR was suggested from the previous research [19]. However, the orders of AR between the first order and the tenth order are found. The results are dis- cussed in Section 4.1. 3.2.2 Modifed Median Frequency Modified Median Frequency (MMDF) is the frequency at which the spectrum is divided into two regions with equal amplitude. It can be expressed as MMNF M = ∑ j 1 = f A j j M ∑ j 1 = A , j (15) where fj is the frequency of spectrum at frequency bin j. 3.2.4-3.2.5 Mean Frequency and Median Frequency Traditional median frequency (MDF) and traditional mean frequency (MNF) are calculated based on power spectrum. We can calculate using the sEMG power spec- trum Pj instead of amplitude spectrum Aj. They can be expressed as MDF ∑ j 1 = P j = j M ∑ = MDF P j = 1 2 M ∑ j 1 = P , j MNF M = ∑ j 1 = f P j j M ∑ j 1 = P . j (16) (17) The outline of amplitude spectrum and power spec- trum is similar but the amplitude value of amplitude spectrum is larger than amplitude value of power spec- trum as shown in Fig. 4. Moreover, the variation of ampli- tude spectrum is less than the power spectrum. For that reason, variation of MMNF and MMDF is also less than traditional MNF and MDF. 3.3 Evaluation methods The percentage error (PE) is used to evaluate the quality of the robust of WGN of EMG features, as in MMDF ∑ j 1 = A j = j = M ∑ MMDF A j = 1 2 M ∑ j 1 = A , j (14) PE = feature feature − clean feature clean noise × 100% , (18) where Aj is the sEMG amplitude spectrum at frequency bin j. 3.2.3 Modifed Mean Frequency where featureclean denotes the feature vector of the original sEMG signal and featurenoise represents the feature vector of the noisy sEMG signal. WGN at different level is added
JOURNAL OF COMPUTING, VOLUME 1, ISSUE 1, DECEMBER 2009, ISSN: 2151-9617 HTTPS://SITES.GOOGLE.COM/SITE/JOURNALOFCOMPUTING/ 76 (a) (c) (b) (d) (e) (f) Fig. 6. Average PE of sEMG signals of (a) features in time domain based on signal amplitude, 3.1.1-3.1.9 (b) ZC with various threshold value (10-50 mV) (c) SSC with various threshold value (10-50 mV) (d) WAMP with various threshold value (10-50 mV) (e) HEMG with various segment parameters (3, 5, 7, 9, 11 segments) (f) AR coefficients with various orders (1-10) at various signal-to-noise ratios (20-0 dB) in four motions. to the original sEMG signal. The performance of the methods is the best when PE is the smallest value. We calculated average PE for each motion with ten repeated datasets. Therefore, there are 80 datasets with four motions and two channels for each feature and noise level was varied from 20 to 0 dB SNR for each dataset. Moreover, WGN was added 10 times in each noise level to confirm the results. SNR is calculated by SNR P = 10log clean P noise , (19) where Pclean is power of the original sEMG signal and Pnoise is power of WGN. The classification rate (CR) is used to evaluate the qual- ity of the recognition system with the noisy environment of sEMG signal. The performance of the methods is the
JOURNAL OF COMPUTING, VOLUME 1, ISSUE 1, DECEMBER 2009, ISSN: 2151-9617 HTTPS://SITES.GOOGLE.COM/SITE/JOURNALOFCOMPUTING/ 77 (a) (b) Fig. 7. (a-b) Average PE of strong sEMG signals of nine selected features at various signal-to-noise ratios (20-0 dB SNRs) in four motions. (c-d) Average PE of weak sEMG signals of nine selected features at various signal-to-noise ratios (20-0 dB SNRs) in four motions. (c) (d) best when the CR values still have the same value with the noisy sEMG signals. Original sEMG signal and noisy sEMG signal were sent to hand movement recognition. In this study, we evaluated the performance of robust fea- tures in pattern recognition view point with Myoelectric Control development (MEC) toolbox [17]. The window size is 256 ms and window slide is 64 ms for the real-time constraint that the response time should be less than 300 ms. The feature vector of selected robust features was evaluated by linear discriminant anslysis classifier (LDA) and majority vote (MV) post-processing was performed in this study. In summary, the robust features should have the small value of PE and still have maximum classi- fication accuracy. 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 4.1 The Quality of the Robustness of EMG Features with WGN To test the robustness of sixteen traditional features and two novel features, we measured the PE with sEMG sig- nal with additive WGN. The results of PE are plotted for SNRs from 20 dB to 0 dB, as shown in Fig. 6-7, in practice; we can select feature extraction to be suitable for each application depend on the level of interference of sEMG system. For the easy way to describe the results of a large number of features, we discussed and evaluated the fea- tures that have the same pattern in recognition and eva- luated some parameter of each feature in Fig. 6. As a re- sult, only nine representatives are discussed as the results shown in Fig. 7. In Fig. 6 (a), the PE of time domain features computed  using  sEMG  signal  amplitude  demonstrates that RMS results in powerful performance in robust noise tolerance than the other features.  Hence,  RMS  feature  is  used  to  represent  the  features  in  this  group.  Fig.  6  (b‐d)  present  the  evaluation  of  suitable value of threshold. Threshold value was chosen between 10 and 50 mV. The optimal threshold is 10 mV for ZC and WAMP but the suitable threshold of SSC is 30 mV. However, the minimum PE of SSC is higher than ZC and WAMP. ZC and WAMP with 10 mV threshold value are selected for the representative features of this group. Afterward, the second bin of the third segment HEMG was adopted from the result in Fig. 6 (e) and the first-order of AR is chosen because the PE of the other AR orders are much bigger than the first one as shown in Fig. 6 (f). Therefore, we evaluated the performance of robustness of nine representative features namely RMS, ZC and WAMP with 10 mV threshold, HEMG with 2nd bin, AR order 1, MNF, MDF, MMNF, and MMDF. Two types of
JOURNAL OF COMPUTING, VOLUME 1, ISSUE 1, DECEMBER 2009, ISSN: 2151-9617 HTTPS://SITES.GOOGLE.COM/SITE/JOURNALOFCOMPUTING/ 78 CLASSIFICATION RATE (%) OF 7 EMG FEATURES USING LEAVE-ONE-OUT VALIDATION Level of SNR noise TABLE 1 20 dB 15 dB Clean 10 dB 60.7835 49.1590 41.7926 34.6817 79.3059 34.1707 14.4347 12.5186 86.6298 92.2504 47.0087 21.6095 41.1326 36.3636 32.6804 17.1386 Method HEMG WL WAMP MMNF MAV,WL, ZC,SSC RMS,AR2 HEMG,WA MP,MMNF 95.6781 67.4260 22.5676 7.9838 96.4871 89.8872 64.8712 25.2714 93.0807 96.1891 64.0622 28.1243 (a) sEMG signal, strong signals and weak signals, are used to evaluate the robust of nine features. The weak sEMG sig- nal has the effect of interference more than the strong sEMG signal. In practice, we can select the robust features to be suitable for each application. Fig. 7 (a) and Fig. 7 (b) show the average PE of strong sEMG. For strong sEMG signals and low noise, SNR more than 10 dB, MMNF has the smallest average PE, followed closely by the MMDF, MNF, and MND. For SNR less than 10 dB that showed high noise, the PE of MNF and MDF rapidly increased and SNR less than 3 dB that showed very high noise, WAMP has the average PE close to MMNF. The average error of MMNF in strong sEMG with very high noise, 0 dB SNR, is only 6%. Moreover in wrist extension and hand open from extensor carpi radialis longus, it is only 3.5%. HEMG and ZC have slightly larger error compared to the first group in Fig. 7 (b). The PE of RMS and AR1 are large that they were expected to perform poorly. The average PE of weak sEMG signals shown in Fig. 7 (c-d) clearly demonstrate that MMNF is the best robust- ness feature and closed by MMDF and HEMG, whereas the error of other features is more than 20%. In very high noise, 0 dB SNR, it provides average PE about 10% and the PE of wrist extension from flexor carpi radialis is only 5%. Other feature results are similar to the results of strong sEMG signal but the results of PE of weak sEMG signal are larger than the PE of strong sEMG signal. The results above show that MMNF was the best feature comparing with others in four motions. In summary, MMDF and WAMP can be used with HEMG for multi- feature. Hence, it is compared the classification results in noisy environment with other successful individual fea- ture and multi-feature sets from the literatures [5, 14-15, 20] in Section 4.2. 4.2 The Quality of the Recognition System of EMG Features with the Noisy Environment Four individual features and three multi-feature sets are examined in this study. The classification results of seven representative features are reported in Table 1. Leave- one-out validation was used to guarantee an exact per- formance measure for this dataset. The first single robust (b) Fig. 8. Plot of the classification results as a function of time (Top) and plot of confusion matrix (Below) of our multi-feature set with (a) original sEMG signal. (b) noisy sEMG signal, 15 dB SNR. feature is HEMG that suggested by Zardoshti-Kermani et al. [5] and is comfirmed with our result in Section 4.1. The second feature, WL is recommended by Oskoei and H. Hu [15] that it is the best single feature in their experi- ment. Lastly, two individual features, WAMP and MMNF, are aprroved by our previous experiment [14] and the experimental results in this paper. The recogni- tion results of single feature did not perform well but it is commonly used in EMG recognition system. The CR of WAMP in clean and low noisy environment is good but its CR is rapidly decreased in high noise. The CR of HEMG is still stability even if noise increases. In addition, no surprising that the CR of WL in noisy environment is poor that comfired by the result in Section 4.1 and the CR of MMNF is poor because of the limitation of their ability to discriminate between classes. However, in practice, we are usually combined this feature with other features to get the useful information features. Because of only one feature per channel of feature that provided from features in time domain and frequency domain, it is effective and small enough to combine with other features for a more powerful feature vector and avoiding additional signifi- cant computational burden.
分享到:
收藏