Optimal a Posteriori Time Domain Filter for Average Evoked Potentials

IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering

Volumn 38, Issue 9, 1991, Pages 827-833

  Furst, Miriam ^a   Blau, Avi ^a  

^a TEL AVIV UNIVERSITY   (Israel)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING - ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAPHY; NOISE, SPURIOUS SIGNAL; PROBABILITY - RANDOM PROCESSES; SIGNAL DETECTION; SIGNAL FILTERING AND PREDICTION;

A POSTERIORI OPTIMAL FILTER; EVOKED POTENTIALS MEASUREMENT; SUBOPTIMAL FILTER;

BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING;

ARTICLE; EVOKED RESPONSE; FILTER;

ALGORITHMS; COMPUTER SYSTEMS; EVOKED POTENTIALS; SIGNAL PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED;

EID: 0026228570     PISSN: 00189294     EISSN: 15582531     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1109/10.83602     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. E. H. Carlton and S. Katz, “Is Wiener filtering an effective method of improving evoked potential estimation?,” IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng., vol. BME-27, pp. 187–192, Apr. 1980.
2. M. Don, C. Elberling, and M. Waring, “Objective detection of averaged auditory brainstem responses,” Scand. Audiol., vol. 13, pp. 219–228, 1984.
3. C. Doncarli and L. Goering, “Adaptive smoothing of evoked potentials,” in Proc. 10th Annu. Conf. Eng. Med. Biol., 1988, pp. 1152–1153.
4. D. J. Doyle, “Some comments on the use of Wiener filtering for the estimation of evoked potentials,” Electroencephal. Clin. Neurophysiol, vol. 38, pp. 533–534, 1975.
5. C. Elberling and M. Don, “Quality estimation of averaged auditory brainstem responses,” Scand. Audiol., vol. 13, pp. 187–197, 1984.
6. C. Elberling and O. Wahlgreen, “Estimation of auditory brainstem response, ABR, by means of Bayesian inference,” Scand. Audiol., vol. 14, pp. 89–96, 1985.
7. E. M. Glaser and D. S. Ruchkin, Principles of Neurobiological Signal Analysis. New York: Academic, 1976.
8. D. Graupe, Time Series Analysis, Identification and Adaptive Filtering. Malabar, FL: Robert E. Krieger, 1984.
9. M. Hoke, B. Ross, R. Wickesberg, and B. Lutkenhoner, “Weighted averaging— Theory and application to electric response audiometry,” Electroencephal. Clin. Neurophysiol., vol. 57, pp. 484–489, 1984.
10. R. A. Levine, “Auditory evoked potentials: Engineering considerations,” in Proc. Conf. IEEE Eng. Med. Biol. Soc., 1982, pp. 85–89.
11. C. D. McGillem, J. I. Aunon, and K-B Yu, “Signals and noise in evoked brain potentials,” IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng., vol. BME-32, pp. 1012–1016, Dec. 1985.
12. A. Papoulis, Probability, Random Variables, and Stochastic Processes, 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1984.
13. B. S. Perlman and V. H. Auerbach, “A phase-locking technique for estimating the ensemble average of time-series data,” IEEE Trans. Acoust. Speech Signal Proc, vol. 25, pp. 295–299, 1977.
14. N. V. Thakor, “Adaptive filtering of evoked potentials,” IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng., vol. BME-34, pp. 6–12, Jan. 1987.
15. D. Walter, “A posterior ‘Wiener filtering’ of average evoked responses,” Electroencephal. Clin. Neurophysiol., suppl. vol. 27, pp. 61–70, 1969.
16. J. P. C. de Weerd and W. L. J. Martens, “Theory and practice of a posteriori ‘Wiener’ filtering of average evoked potentials,” Biol. Cybern., vol. 30, pp. 81–94, 1978.
17. J. P. C. de Weerd, “A posteriori time-varying filtering of averaged evoked potentials. Parts 1 and II,” Biol. Cybern., vol. 41, pp. 211–234, 1981.
18. K.-B. Yu and C. D. MacGillem, “Optimum filters for estimating evoked potential waveforms,” IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng., vol. BME-30, pp. 730–737, Nov. 1983.