Sie sind auf Seite 1von 4

Discrimination of Scalp EEG signals in Wavelet Transform Domain and Channel Selection for the Patient-invariant Seizure Detection

Anindya Bijoy Das , Md. Jubaer Hossain Pantho and Mohammed Imamul Hassan Bhuiyan

Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering(Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology, Bangladesh) Email: anindya149@yahoo.com

Abstract—In this paper, a statistical method of classifying Electroencephalogram(EEG) data for automatic detection of epileptic seizure is carried out using a publicly available scalp EEG database. The classification is carried out to distinguish the seizure segments from the non-seizure ones. The higher order moments (specifically variance) have been calculated in various sub-bands in the wavelet transform domain and utilized as the discriminating feature in the Support Vector Machine(SVM) classifier. The method is tested on 175 hours of continuous EEG data from five patients and on an average, 99% accuracy has been achieved with very high values of sensitivity and specificity. Furthermore, on the basis of the figure of merits, for their excellent performance for all the patients, seven channels have been selected for the patient-invariant seizure detection which might help the electroencephalographers reducing their laborious job of monitoring the EEG data from all the channels.

Keywords—

Electroencephalogram(EEG);

Seizure;

Wavelet Transform; Support Vector Machine(SVM)

I. INTRODUCTION

Epilepsy is a neurological disorder that arises due to ab- normal and excessive or synchronous neuronal activity in the brain and causes the disruption of the nerve cells and leads to unprovoked seizures. It has considerable economic implications in terms of health-care needs, and sometimes, may result in death of matured persons. Around 1% of the world’s population is affected by epilepsy, and nearly 25% of them cannot be treated effectively by available therapies due to resistance to drugs [1]. However, the resection of the epileptogenic zone is rather difficult due to the overlay with other eloquent areas responsible for language, primary motor and vision. Closed-loop neuro-stimulators, for example, the cranially implanted responsive neurostimulator (RNS) [2], can be a possible effective solution in such cases. Here, the seizure detection is carried out by analyzing the Electroen- cephalogram(EEG) signals that reveal the seizures as rhythmic discharges. But, diagnosing epilepsy requires the observation of a voluminous EEG data by expert neurologists, lasting for days to weeks which is time consuming and may lead to error. Therefore, it underscores an effective and fast detection of seizure onset which can be helpful by generating alarms, thus relieving the neurologists of the burden of time consuming observations. In the EEG literature, various algorithms have been pro- posed for the detection of epileptic seizure [3]- [14]. Prior to

feature extraction, the recent approaches suggest to decompose the original EEG signals and analyze in various domains like Empirical Mode Decomposition(EMD) domain [3]; Hilbert Transformation [13]; Discrete Wavelet Transformation(DWT) [5], [7]; dual tree complex wavelet transform domain [6], [11]; Wavelet Packet Transform [12] ; etc, because the underlying dynamics can be analyzed more precisely in the decomposed version rather than the original EEG. After the decomposition of EEG signals, various types of features have been shown to be quite effective to classify the EEG data, which include lyapunov exponents and correlation dimension [9]; higher or- der moments [3], [11]; probability density function parameters [6], different types of entropy [13] among others. The first objective of this paper is to categorize the scalp EEG signals in the wavelet transform (WT) domain and em- ploy a suitable classifier for distinguishing ictal EEG signals from the inter-ictal ones where the higher order statistical mo- ments (specifically, variance) in the sub-band levels would be utilized as the discriminating features. The main reason behind choosing WT is that the diverse process of brain dynamics and associated neuronal activities are more obvious in frequency sub-bands as compared to the band-limited EEG signals [8]. However, the EEG signals are acquired from various channels as the internationally recognized electrode placement systems. It is very much time-consuming to carefully analyze the EEG data from all the channels, and for this reason, the final objective of this paper is to investigate to find out the most effective channels to discriminate the seizure segments from the non-seizure ones. These kinds of analysis may result in the fast detection of seizure, and help researchers in developing some improved algorithms.

II. DESCRIPTION OF THE EEG DATABASE

In this paper, the analysis in the wavelet transform domain is carried out using a publicly available database [15], [16] acquired with the help of a team of investigators from the Chil- dren Hospital Boston(CHB) and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology(MIT). The most important reason behind using the Scalp EEG database is that no resection is needed for acquiring these kinds of EEG signals. Besides, the large volume of this CHB-MIT database helps to provide the statistical significance of the analysis.

Fig. 1. One hour data for patient CHB-01 for sample five channels. This database consists

Fig. 1. One hour data for patient CHB-01 for sample five channels.

This database consists of EEG recordings from 23 pa- tients with intractable seizures. The patients were monitored for up to several days following withdrawal of anti-seizure medication in order to characterize their seizures and assess their candidacy for surgical intervention. The recordings were collected from 23 subjects (5 males, ages 3-22 years; and 18 females, ages 1.5-19 years). Each case contains 9 to 42 hours of continuous EEG signals. In this paper, five patients have been randomly chosen for analysis. Table I shows the age, gender and the description of the seizure events of them.

TABLE I

DESCRIPTION OF THE FIVE PATIENTS

       

Total

 

Patient

Age

(yr)

Gender

Number

of seizure

duration of

seizure (sec)

Total Data

Duration (hr)

CHB 01

11

Female

7

442

38

hrs

CHB 02

11

Male

3

172

35

hrs

CHB 10

3

Male

7

447

42

hrs

CHB 20

6

Female

8

294

30

hrs

CHB 23

6

Female

7

426

30

hrs

These scalp EEG signals are acquired from 21 different channels of the scalp. In this database, the internationally recognized 10-20 electrode placement system [11] of EEG electrode positions and nomenclature was used to acquire the EEG signals. However, all the signals were sampled at 256 samples per second with 16-bit resolution. In Fig. 1, the EEG signals for one hour data for patient CHB-01 for sample five channels are shown where the signals from 2996 seconds to 3036 seconds contain the seizure events. The channel names are mentioned beside their respective EEG signals.

III. DISCRETE WAVELET TRANSFORM (DWT)

Discrete wavelet transform(DWT) has emerged as one of the superior techniques in analyzing non-stationary signals like EEG [5]. DWT employs long time windows for more precise low frequency information, and short time intervals for high frequency information. It has been justified that the wavelet transform had better resolution and high performance for representation and visualization of the epilepsy activity than the short-time Fourier transform. One of the reasons for this is that the diverse processes of brain dynamics and associated neuronal activities are more properly represented in time-frequency sub-bands as compared to the original EEG.

in time-frequency sub-bands as compared to the original EEG. Fig. 2. Wavelet coefficients. Discrete wavelet transform

Fig. 2. Wavelet coefficients.

Discrete wavelet transform (DWT) could analyze the signal at different frequency bands with different resolutions through decomposing the signal into a coarse approximation (c j,k ) and detail information (d j,k ) which can be calculated by-

c j,k =< f(t), φ j,k (t) >= R f (t)2 j φ(2 j t k)dt (1)

2

d j,k =< f(t), ψ j,k (t) >= R f (t)2 j ψ(2 j t k)dt (2)

2

where ψ(t) is the mother wavelet and φ(t) is the basic scaling. The wavelet coefficients for a 10 second EEG signals for non-seizure(left) and seizure(Right) are shown in Fig. 2.

IV. ANALYSIS OF EEG IN WAVELET TRANSFORM DOMAIN

A. Pre-processing and Segmentation

The frequency range of an EEG signal spans over 0 to 60 Hz. The frequencies greater than 60 Hz may be considered as

noise [6], [9]. On the other hand, as the sampling frequency is 256 Hz, the highest frequency component of an EEG segment

of the database is 128 Hz. That’s why, first the frequencies beyond 60 Hz are removed by using a 6th order Butter- worth filter. After that, because of the non-stationary nature [6] of the EEG signals, for each channel, the EEG signals are segmented by four seconds each, which indicates that each segment comprises 1024 points [5].

B. Feature Extraction and Classification

For the purpose of analysis, the band-limited EEG segments, of two seconds each, are subjected to a 4 level Wavelet decomposition. Selecting a wavelet which has the similar shape and frequency characteristics with seizures is also es- sential. Daubechies-4 (db4) wavelet is selected in the present study because of its wide range of use in various seizure detection algorithms [5]. Besides, the smoothing feature of the wavelet makes it more appropriate to detect changes of EEG signals. The EEG signals with sampling rate of 256 Hz were decomposed into five scales, giving the approximation coefficients representing 0-4 Hz (a4) and detail coefficients representing 30-60 Hz (d1), 15-30 Hz (d2), 8-15 Hz (d3), and 4-8 Hz (d4). Reconstructions of these five components using the inverse DWT approximately correspond to the five

physiological EEG sub-bands delta, alpha, beta, gamma and theta respectively [8]. The WT coefficients for any sub-band are characterized with higher order statistical moments such as variance, skewness and kurtosis. The dispersion, asymmetry and peakedness of a dataset are well described by these moments [3]. Among the higher order moments, variance has been shown to be more effective than the others in the frequency domain [11]. For a given dataset X with length N and mean µ, the corresponding variance(σ 2 )is expressed as:

σ 2 =

1

N

N

i=1

(x i µ) 2

(3)

Among the various sub-bands, the d2, d3 and d4 sub-bands have been shown to discriminate the non-seizure and seizure signals with a very high accuracy [11]. That’s why, in this paper, the second order moment, variance, is calculated for the d2, d3 and d4 sub-bands for all the EEG signals for discriminating the seizure segments from the non-seizure ones. A Support Vector Machine (SVM) is a non-linear classifier which is capable of classifying the data having exactly two classes mapping the input features onto a higher dimensional space and by determining the best hyper-plane that separates all data points of one class from those of the other. It has the advantage of the flexible representation of the class boundaries and controls the complexity to reduce over-fitting. In this paper, the SVM proposed by Vapnik [17] is used with the radial-basis function (RBF) kernel for classifying EEG signals. The reason for choosing this SVM is its wide use in classification, regression, and density estimation. However, for the patient specific seizure detection for each of the channel, randomly chosen 20% of seizure and non-seizure segments each, have been used for the training of the classifier and the rest 80% for testing from each of the patient.

C. Results

The performance of the proposed classification method is indicated by the figures of merit, Sensitivity(sen), speci- ficity(spec) and accuracy(acc) which are given by

acc =

sen =

TP TP + FN × 100%

TN TN + FP × 100% TP + TN

spec =

TP + TN + FP + FN × 100%

(4)

(5)

(6)

where TP, TN, FP and FN stand for true positive, true negative, false positive and false negative events, respectively [6]. The low values of sensitivity indicates the failure of a system to detect the seizure, and the low values of specificity indicates increased rate of the false alarms, which are to be discarded by the electroencephalographers manually. Thus, for the automatic system, such a system is required which can provide not only high sensitivity but also high specificity. However, after the training and testing for respective patients,

the classification performance of the proposed patient specific seizure detection method is shown in Table II. From Table II, the following observations can be noted-

Almost all the values of sensitivity, specificity and ac- curacy are quite high (sometimes as high as 100%); which indicates the efficient discrimination capability of variance in the wavelet transform domain while employed in SVM classifier for patient specific seizure detection.

For every patient, among the total 30-40 hours data, except the 5-7 minutes of seizure segments, all are the

non-seizure segments. In its consequence, the values of accuracy is always quite near the values of the specificity.

Different channels provide different results for various patients. For instance, channel P3-O1 provides far better sensitivity for the patients CHB-01, CHB-20 and CHB- 23 than the patients CHB-02 or CHB-10. Channel FP1- F7 provides very good specificity for the patients CHB- 10, CHB-20 and CHB-23 as compared with the patients CHB-01 or CHB-02. Again, each of the channels of Channels C4-P4, P4-O2 and P4-O2 provide far better specificity for patient CHB-02, CHB-10, CHB-20 and CHB-23 than patient CHB-01.

The definitions in (4), (5) and (6) underscore the necessity of high accuracy with high sensitivity and high specificity for all the patients. In this regard, because of their very good performance in terms of sensitivity and specificity for all the patients, channels 2 (F7-T7), 3 (T7-P7), 14 (F8-T8), 15 (T8-P8), 19 (T7-FT9), 20 (FT9-FT10) and 21 (FT10-T8) can be selected for the patient invariant seizure detection algorithm which provide on an average 98%- 99% sensitivity whereas the algorithm in [14] provides about 96% sensitivity. Since the underlying brain dynamics is spread over the brain, no single channel can be selected for the totally ap- propriate detection of seizure. Here, Fig 3 shows the location of the channels indicating the electrode placements for the 10- 20 system. The name 10-20 suggests that the distance between any two adjacent channels is 10% or 20% of the total scalp. It can be easily observed that the selected channels (marked ones) are placed on the side of the perimeter of the scalp which indicates that the maximum amounts of discharges due to seizure reveals near the perimeter of the scalp.

V. C ONCLUSION

In this paper, a statistical method has been proposed to clas- sify the EEG data to detect the epileptic seizure automatically. First, the EEG signals has been decomposed into various sub- bands in the discrete wavelet transform(DWT) domain. The reason behind choosing the DWT domain is the dynamics of brain which is precisely represented in the time-frequency domain. However, the second order moment, variance, which has been shown to be an effective discriminating feature in DWT domain in the available EEG literature, has been calculated in various sub-bands of EEG data and utilized in the SVM classifiers. The analysis is carried out in all the channels for total five patients. While training with the data of the

TABLE II

CLASSIFICATION PERFORMANCE FOR VARIOUS PATIENTS

No.

Channel

 

CHB-01

 

CHB-02

 

CHB-10

 

CHB-20

 

CHB-23

Sen

Spec

Acc

Sen

Spec

Acc

Sen

Spec

Acc

Sen

Spec

Acc

Sen

Spec

Acc

1

FP1-F7

98.64

90.05

90.21

89.53

89.2

89.21

94.66

99.71

99.67

97.97

98.41

98.41

91.51

96.31

96.25

2

F7-T7

98.64

96.73

96.77

95.86

98.62

98.59

96

100

99.96

97.97

96.41

96.43

98.11

99.01

99.01

3

T7-P7

100

97.15

97.21

94.18

97.09

97.03

96

99.91

99.87

97.97

99.3

99.28

98.11

98.26

98.26

4

P7-O7

97.29

95.78

95.81

98.83

97.49

97.52

96

99.11

99.09

89.89

97.67

97.55

96.22

98.35

98.32

5

FP1-F3

97.29

90

90.14

90.69

91.58

91.56

88

90.09

90.07

97.97

95.56

95.59

98.11

96.09

96.11

6

F3-C3

92.56

93.18

93.17

91.86

85.34

85.47

94.64

86.76

86.83

97.97

94.4

94.45

98.11

98.61

98.61

7

C3-P3

80.4

89.97

89.80

86.04

97.04

96.81

94.64

97.14

97.12

97.97

96.81

96.82

97.16

98.16

98.15

8

P3-O1

97.97

98.01

98.01

89.53

98.79

98.61

84.82

99.63

99.5

97.97

97.24

97.25

98.11

98.41

98.41

9

FP2-F4

97.97

92.45

92.56

95.34

80.7

81.01

92.67

77.86

77.99

93.93

95.62

95.59

88.67

86.47

86.5

10

F4-C4

96.62

94.78

94.81

95.34

97.92

97.86

81.25

82.04

82.03

93.93

92.86

92.88

98.11

97.12

97.13

11

C4-P4

91.89

54.3

55.00

87.2

99.19

98.94

96.42

94.34

94.36

93.93

92.86

92.88

97.17

98.11

98.1

12

P4-O2

88.51

61.23

61.74

94.18

98.24

98.16

93.75

98.18

98.14

95.95

97.14

97.12

98.11

92.09

92.17

13

FP2-F8

92.56

94.46

94.43

81.39

77.59

77.67

91.96

89.47

89.49

96.96

98.44

98.42

97.17

88.77

88.88

14

F8-T8

97.89

99.14

99.11

97.20

91.78

91.89

94.64

98.44

98.41

97.97

97.06

97.07

97.17

94.76

94.8

15

T8-P8

98.56

98.51

98.51

95.58

99.97

99.89

99.42

99.36

99.36

94.91

96.35

96.31

94.33

98.31

98.26

16

P8-O2

91.89

50

50.77

73.25

98.12

97.59

93.75

97.79

97.75

91.91

86.61

86.68

96.22

96.32

96.32

17

FZ-CZ

98.64

95.11

95.18

96.51

99.09

99.04

76.78

81.75

81.71

85.09

91.91

85.2

98.11

91.86

91.94

18

CZ-PZ

66.89

87.6

87.21

95.34

93.38

93.42

93.75

82.83

82.93

97.97

96.5

96.52

98.11

94.33

96.72

19

T7-FT9

97.78

98.96

98.95

97.67

96.99

97.01

94.24

98.65

98.61

97.97

95.24

95.28

98.11

98.89

98.88

20

FT9-FT10

98.64

98.26

98.26

100

96.65

96.72

95.57

98.8

98.77

96.96

97.88

97.87

98.11

96.47

96.5

21

FT10-T8

96.51

98.92

98.88

97.02

99.52

99.48

98.66

98.43

98.43

96.91

96.35

96.35

96.22

97.16

97.14

98.43 96.91 96.35 96.35 96.22 97.16 97.14 Fig. 3. Channels for the internationally recognized standard

Fig. 3. Channels for the internationally recognized standard electrode- placement systems with selected channels (F7-T7, T7-P7, F8-T8, T8-P8, T7- FT9, FT9-FT10, FT10-T8.)

respective patient, the classifiers provide quite high accuracy with high sensitivity and high specificity for quite all the channels (sometimes as high as 100%). Furthermore, to take an initiative for the patient in-variant seizure detection system, seven channels have been selected for further improvement of the performance. The future goal of this study is to combine the selected channels and establish a fast and effective algorithm of patient invariant seizure detection.

REFERENCES

[1] Sheng-Fu Liang, Yi-Chun Chen, Yu-Lin Wang, Pin-Tzu Chen, Chia- Hsiang Yang and Herming Chiueh,“A hierarchical approach for online temporal lobe seizure detection in long-term intracranial EEG record- ings,” Journal of Neural Engineering, doi.10, May, 2013. [2] M. T. Salam, M. Sawan and D. K. Nguyen,“Low-Power Implantable Device for Onset Detection and Subsequent Treatment of Epileptic Seizures,” Journal of Healthcare Engineering, vol. 1, no. 5, 2010. [3] S M S. Alam and M. I. H. Bhuiyan, “Detection of Seizure and Epilepsy using Higherorder Statistics in the EMD Domain,” IEEE Transactions on Information Technology in BioMedicine, vol. 17, pp. 312-318, 2013.

[4] A. S. Zandi, M. Javidan, G.A. Dumont and R. Tafreshi, “Automated Real-Time Epileptic Seizure Detection in Scalp EEG Recordings Using an Algorithm Based on Wavelet Packet Transform,” IEEE Transactions On Biomedical Engineering. vol. 57, issue. 5, pp. 1639-1651, June, 2010. [5] Liu, Y., Zhou, W., Yuan, Q., Chen, S., “ Automatic seizure detection using wavelet transformation and SVM in long term intracranial EEG”, IEEE Trans. Neural Syst. Rehabil. Eng. vol. 6, no. 20, 2012. [6] A. B. Das, M. I. H. Bhuiyan and S M S. Alam,“Classification of EEG signals using normal inverse Gaussian parameters in the dual- tree complex wavelet transform domain for seizure detection”, Proc. of Springer Signal, Image and Video Processing, 2014. [7] Panda, R., Khobragade, P.S., Jambhule, P.D., Jengthe, S.N., Pal, P.R. and Gandhi, T.K., “Classification of EEG signal using wavelet transform and support vector machine for epileptic seizure diction”, Proc. of IEEE Systems in Medicine and Biology (ICSMB)), December, 2010. [8] H. Adeli, S.G.Dastidar and N.Dadmehr,“A Wavelet-Chaos Methodology for Analysis of EEGs and EEG Sub-Bands to Detect Seizure and Epilepsy,” IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering, 2007. [9] A. T. Tzallas, M. G. Tsipouras and D. I. Fotiadis, “Epileptic Seizure Detection in EEGs Using Time-Frequency Analysis,” IEEE Transactions on Information Technology in Biomedicine, vol. 13, no. 5, 2009. [10] Ali Shoeb, “Patient-Specific Seizure Onset Detection”, Epilepsy and Behavior vol. 4, no. 5, pp. 483-498, 2004. [11] A. B. Das, M. I. H.Bhuiyan and S M S. Alam,“A Statistical Method For Automatic Detection of Seizure and Epilepsy in the Dual Tree Complex Wavelet Transform Domain”, Proc. of IEEE International Conference on Informatics, Electronics and Vision, May, Bangladesh, 2014. [12] A. S. Zandi, M. Javidan, G.A. Dumont and R. Tafreshi, “Automated Real-Time Epileptic Seizure Detection in Scalp EEG Recordings Using an Algorithm Based on Wavelet Packet Transform,” IEEE Transactions On Biomedical Engineering. vol. 57, issue. 5, pp. 1639-1651, June, 2010. [13] Kai Fu, Jianfeng Qua, Yi Chai and Tao Zou, “Hilbert marginal spectrum analysis for automatic seizure detection in EEG signals”, Elsevier Journal of Biomedical Signal Processing and Control, vol. 18, 2015. [14] Ali Shoeb, John Guttag, “ Application of Machine Learning to Epileptic Seizure Onset Detection”, 27th International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), June 21-24, 2010. [15] A. Goldberger , L. Amaral, L. Glass , J. Hausdorff, P. Ivanov, R. Mark, J. Mietus, G. Moody, C. Peng and H. Stanley, “ PhysioBank, PhysioToolkit, and PhysioNet: Components of a New Research Resource for Complex Physiologic Signals”, Circulation, vol. 23, no. 101, 2000.

CHB-MIT EEG Database: http://www.physionet.org/pn6/chbmit/ , 2000.

[17] V. Vapnik, “The Nature of Statistical Learning Theory, New York:

[16]

Springer-Verlag”, 1995.