↓ Skip to main content

Single-trial event-related potential extraction through one-unit ICA-with-reference

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Neural Engineering, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
30 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Single-trial event-related potential extraction through one-unit ICA-with-reference
Published in
Journal of Neural Engineering, October 2016
DOI 10.1088/1741-2560/13/6/066010
Pubmed ID
Authors

Wee Lih Lee, Tele Tan, Torbjörn Falkmer, Yee Hong Leung

Abstract

In recent years, ICA has been one of the more popular methods for extracting event-related potential (ERP) at the single-trial level. It is a blind source separation technique that allows the extraction of an ERP without making strong assumptions on the temporal and spatial characteristics of an ERP. However, the problem with traditional ICA is that the extraction is not direct and is time-consuming due to the need for source selection processing. In this paper, the application of an one-unit ICA-with-Reference (ICA-R), a constrained ICA method, is proposed. In cases where the time-region of the desired ERP is known a priori, this time information is utilized to generate a reference signal, which is then used for guiding the one-unit ICA-R to extract the source signal of the desired ERP directly. Our results showed that, as compared to traditional ICA, ICA-R is a more effective method for analysing ERP because it avoids manual source selection and it requires less computation thus resulting in faster ERP extraction. In addition to that, since the method is automated, it reduces the risks of any subjective bias in the ERP analysis. It is also a potential tool for extracting the ERP in online application.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Korea, Republic of 1 3%
Unknown 29 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 30%
Student > Master 7 23%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 7%
Student > Bachelor 2 7%
Professor 2 7%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 5 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 17 57%
Computer Science 3 10%
Neuroscience 3 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Unknown 6 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 October 2016.
All research outputs
#7,489,401
of 22,893,031 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neural Engineering
#654
of 1,618 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#114,777
of 319,861 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neural Engineering
#8
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,893,031 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,618 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.9. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 319,861 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.