↓ Skip to main content

Hybrid fNIRS-EEG based classification of auditory and visual perception processes

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroscience, November 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
101 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
167 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
Hybrid fNIRS-EEG based classification of auditory and visual perception processes
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroscience, November 2014
DOI 10.3389/fnins.2014.00373
Pubmed ID
Authors

Felix Putze, Sebastian Hesslinger, Chun-Yu Tse, YunYing Huang, Christian Herff, Cuntai Guan, Tanja Schultz

Abstract

For multimodal Human-Computer Interaction (HCI), it is very useful to identify the modalities on which the user is currently processing information. This would enable a system to select complementary output modalities to reduce the user's workload. In this paper, we develop a hybrid Brain-Computer Interface (BCI) which uses Electroencephalography (EEG) and functional Near Infrared Spectroscopy (fNIRS) to discriminate and detect visual and auditory stimulus processing. We describe the experimental setup we used for collection of our data corpus with 12 subjects. On this data, we performed cross-validation evaluation, of which we report accuracy for different classification conditions. The results show that the subject-dependent systems achieved a classification accuracy of 97.8% for discriminating visual and auditory perception processes from each other and a classification accuracy of up to 94.8% for detecting modality-specific processes independently of other cognitive activity. The same classification conditions could also be discriminated in a subject-independent fashion with accuracy of up to 94.6 and 86.7%, respectively. We also look at the contributions of the two signal types and show that the fusion of classifiers using different features significantly increases accuracy.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 167 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 2 1%
Brazil 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Iran, Islamic Republic of 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 160 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 41 25%
Student > Master 21 13%
Researcher 19 11%
Student > Bachelor 14 8%
Student > Postgraduate 7 4%
Other 24 14%
Unknown 41 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 38 23%
Psychology 22 13%
Neuroscience 16 10%
Computer Science 12 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 7%
Other 14 8%
Unknown 54 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 27 February 2019.
All research outputs
#2,863,754
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#1,890
of 11,538 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38,651
of 369,879 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#21
of 116 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,538 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its peers.
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 369,879 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 116 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.