2023/10/29 by Xiong Xiong, Su Li, Xiong, Xiong +5
Computer Science · Engineering · Neuroscience · #Advanced Memory and Neural Computing #Blind Source Separation Techniques #EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces #FOS: Biological sciences #FOS: Computer and information sciences #FOS: Electrical engineering #Machine Learning (cs.LG) #Quantitative Methods (q-bio.QM) #Signal Processing (eess.SP) #electronic engineering #information engineering
paper · pdf · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2310.19198
openalex publication_date 2023/10/29 · openalex created_date 2023/11/01 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/28
Objective: Motor Imagery (MI) serves as a crucial experimental paradigm within the realm of Brain Computer Interfaces (BCIs), aiming to decoding motor intentions from electroencephalogram (EEG) signals. Method: Drawing inspiration from Riemannian geometry and Cross-Frequency Coupling (CFC), this paper introduces a novel approach termed Riemann Tangent Space Mapping using Dichotomous Filter Bank with Convolutional Neural Network (DFBRTS) to enhance the representation quality and decoding capability pertaining to MI features. DFBRTS first initiates the process by meticulously filtering EEG signals through a Dichotomous Filter Bank, structured in the fashion of a complete binary tree. Subsequently, it employs Riemann Tangent Space Mapping to extract salient EEG signal features within each sub-band. Finally, a lightweight convolutional neural network is employed for further feature extraction and classification, operating under the joint supervision of cross-entropy and center loss. To validate the efficacy, extensive experiments were conducted using DFBRTS on two well-established benchmark datasets: the BCI competition IV 2a (BCIC-IV-2a) dataset and the OpenBMI dataset. The performance of DFBRTS was benchmarked against several state-of-the-art MI decoding methods, alongside other Riemannian geometry-based MI decoding approaches. Results: DFBRTS significantly outperforms other MI decoding algorithms on both datasets, achieving a remarkable classification accuracy of 78.16% for four-class and 71.58% for two-class hold-out classification, as compared to the existing benchmarks.