Added on augmentation info
This commit is contained in:
@ -63,6 +63,9 @@ TODO: very interesting worth reading more times.
|
|||||||
## Augmenting The Size of EEG datasets Using Generative Adversarial Networks (2018)
|
## Augmenting The Size of EEG datasets Using Generative Adversarial Networks (2018)
|
||||||
Explained here: [[Augmentation methods#EEG Data Augmentation Method for Identity Recognition Based on Spatial–Temporal Generating Adversarial Network]]
|
Explained here: [[Augmentation methods#EEG Data Augmentation Method for Identity Recognition Based on Spatial–Temporal Generating Adversarial Network]]
|
||||||
Link: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/8489727
|
Link: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/8489727
|
||||||
|
Authors propose architecture of recurrent generative adversarial network (RGAN). The main feature is using recurrent neural network in generator.
|
||||||
|

|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
## Generative Adversarial Networks-Based Data Augmentation for Brain–Computer Interface(2020)
|
## Generative Adversarial Networks-Based Data Augmentation for Brain–Computer Interface(2020)
|
||||||
Explained here: [[Augmentation methods#EEG Data Augmentation Method for Identity Recognition Based on Spatial–Temporal Generating Adversarial Network]]
|
Explained here: [[Augmentation methods#EEG Data Augmentation Method for Identity Recognition Based on Spatial–Temporal Generating Adversarial Network]]
|
||||||
@ -90,6 +93,21 @@ Down-sampled to 100 Hz. Only testing generalizability, using the adaptive traini
|
|||||||
Extracting that specific vector can be done with (now only thinking) some clustering or find method which would find discriminative features given labels.
|
Extracting that specific vector can be done with (now only thinking) some clustering or find method which would find discriminative features given labels.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
## Data augmentation strategies for EEG-based motor imagery decoding (2022)
|
||||||
|
Link: https://www.cell.com/heliyon/fulltext/S2405-8440(22)01528-6
|
||||||
|
Good introduction, can be used to source citation to intro.
|
||||||
|
Evaluation of these augmentation techniques:
|
||||||
|
* Averaging randomly selected trials - no good
|
||||||
|
* Recombining time slices of randomly selected trials - no good
|
||||||
|
* Recombining frequency slices of randomly selected data - no good
|
||||||
|
* Gaussian noise addition
|
||||||
|
* Cropping
|
||||||
|
* Variational autoencoders data synthesis. Kullback-Leibler (KL) divergence and mean square reconstruction loss.
|
||||||
|
Metrics for evaluation of generated data:
|
||||||
|
* Accuracy of prediction
|
||||||
|
* Frechet inception distance
|
||||||
|
* t-distributed stochastic neighbor embedding plots
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
@ -35,3 +35,21 @@ Adaptive training - train on all subjects and half data of one subject. Test on
|
|||||||
Down-sampled to 100 Hz. Only testing generalizability, using the adaptive training with and without augmented data.
|
Down-sampled to 100 Hz. Only testing generalizability, using the adaptive training with and without augmented data.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
### [[Augmentation methods#Augmenting The Size of EEG datasets Using Generative Adversarial Networks (2018)]]
|
||||||
|
* Evaluation using 5 fold cross-validation on dataset PhysioNet against AutoEncoders and VAE. Using metric reconstruction error.
|
||||||
|
* Assesing impact of RGAN with different classification models. Evaluating classifcation accuracy on deep feed-forward NN, SVM, random forest tree.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
## [[Augmentation methods#Data augmentation strategies for EEG-based motor imagery decoding (2022)]]
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Used datasets:
|
||||||
|
* https://academic.oup.com/gigascience/article/6/7/gix034/3796323
|
||||||
|
* https://www.nature.com/articles/sdata2018211
|
||||||
|
For now I don't know where to get raw data of those datasets
|
||||||
|
Data processing:
|
||||||
|
* Bandpass filter 1-40 Hz
|
||||||
|
* Baseline correction was performed with the first 200ms pre-cue. Subtract average of eeg signal before the cue
|
||||||
|
* Artifact correction, oculograph and myograph. Slightly different parameters for each dataset
|
||||||
|
* Data re-referencing to average to improve the signal-to-noise ratio. The signal at each channel is re-referenced to the average signal across all electrodes.
|
||||||
|
* Used [[Papers#Autoreject Automated artifact rejection for MEG and EEG data]]
|
||||||
|
Dataset was split in ratio 70:12:18 between train:validation:test.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
@ -160,6 +160,9 @@ Variations of VAE:
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
## Autoreject: Automated artifact rejection for MEG and EEG data
|
||||||
|
Link: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1053811917305013
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
TODO:
|
TODO:
|
||||||
- find augmentation methods worth of trying
|
- find augmentation methods worth of trying
|
||||||
|
BIN
images/Pasted_image_20250616105342.png
(Stored with Git LFS)
Normal file
BIN
images/Pasted_image_20250616105342.png
(Stored with Git LFS)
Normal file
Binary file not shown.
Reference in New Issue
Block a user