Selection of Reference Channels Based on Mutual Information for Frequency-Dependent Subtraction Method Applied to Fetal Biomagnetic Signals

IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering

Volumn 64, Issue 5, 2017, Pages 1115-1122

  Escalona Vargas, D ^a   Siegel, E R ^a   Murphy, P ^a   Lowery, C L ^a   Eswaran, H ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS FOR MEDICAL SCIENCES   (United States)

Author keywords

Fetal magnetocardiography (fMCG); fetal magnetoencephalography (fMEG); frequency dependent subtraction (SUBTR) method; mutual information

Indexed keywords

BRAIN MAPPING; MAGNETOCARDIOGRAPHY;

BIOMAGNETIC SIGNALS; FETAL MAGNETOCARDIOGRAPHY (FMCG); FETAL MAGNETOENCEPHALOGRAPHY (FMEG); FREQUENCY DEPENDENT; INTERFERENCE REMOVAL; MAGNETOCARDIOGRAMS; MINIMAL REDUNDANCY; MUTUAL INFORMATIONS;

MAGNETOENCEPHALOGRAPHY;

AMPLITUDE MODULATION; ARTICLE; ARTIFACT REDUCTION; ATTENUATION; FETAL MAGNETOCARDIOGRAPHY; FETAL MAGNETOENCEPHALOGRAPHY; FETUS; FREQUENCY DEPENDENT SUBTRACTION; HUMAN; IMAGE SUBTRACTION; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAGNETOCARDIOGRAPHY; MAGNETOENCEPHALOGRAPHY; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; SENSOR; ALGORITHM; BRAIN; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; EMBRYOLOGY; PHYSIOLOGY; PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS; PROCEDURES; REFERENCE VALUE; REPRODUCIBILITY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SIGNAL PROCESSING;

ALGORITHMS; BRAIN; DIAGNOSIS, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; HUMANS; MAGNETOENCEPHALOGRAPHY; PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS; REFERENCE VALUES; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SIGNAL PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED;

EID: 85019011353     PISSN: 00189294     EISSN: 15582531     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1109/TBME.2016.2591443     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. H. Preissl et al., "Fetal magnetoencephalography: Current progress and trends," Exp. Neurol., vol. 190, pp. 28-36, 2004.
2. H. Eswaran et al., "Fetal magnetoencephalography-A multimodal approach," Develop. Brain Res., vol. 154, no. 1, pp. 57-62, 2005.
3. C. J. Sheridan et al., "Fetal magnetoencephalography-Achievements and challenges in the study of prenatal and early postnatal brain responses: a review," Infant Child Develop., vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 80-93, 2010.
4. J. Vrba et al., "Human fetal brain imaging by magnetoencephalography: Verification of fetal brain signals by comparison with fetal brain models," Neuroimage, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 1009-1020, 2004.
5. J. Vrba, "Multichannel SQUID biomagnetic systems," in Applications of Superconductivity. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer, 2000, pp. 61-138.
6. J.McCubbin et al., "Optimal reduction ofMCG in fetal MEG recordings," IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng., vol. 53, no. 8, pp. 1720-1724, Aug. 2006.
7. J. Vrba et al., "Removal of interference from fetal MEG by frequency dependent subtraction," NeuroImage, vol. 59, no. 3, pp. 2475-2484, 2012.
8. J. S. Bendat and A. G. Piersol, Random Data: Analysis and Measurement Procedures, 2nd ed. New York, NY, USA: Wiley, 1990.
9. J. Vrba et al., "Fetal MEG redistribution by projection operators," IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng., vol. 51, no. 7, pp. 1207-1218, Jul. 2004.
10. F. Vrins et al., "Sensor array and electrode selection for non-invasive fetal electrocardiogram extraction by independent component analysis," in Independent Component Analysis and Blind Signal Separation. Berlin, Germany: Springer, 2004, pp. 1017-1024.
11. R. Sameni et al., "Electrode selection for noninvasive fetal electrocardiogram extraction using mutual information criteria," in Proc. 26th Int. Workshop Bayesian Inference Maximum Entropy Methods Sci. Eng., vol. 872, 2006, pp. 97-104.
12. H. Peng et al., "Feature selection based on mutual information criteria of max-dependency, max-relevance, and min-redundancy," IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell., vol. 27, no. 8, pp. 1226-1238, Aug. 2005.
13. G. Brown, "A newperspective for information theoretic feature selection," in Proc. Int. Conf. Artif. Intell. Stat., 2009, pp. 49-56.
14. J. R. Vergara and P. A. Estévez, "A review of feature selection methods based on mutual information," Neural Comput. Appl., vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 175-186, 2014.
15. T. M. Cover and J. A. Thomas, Elements of Information Theory. New York, NY, USA: Wiley, 2012.
16. G. Brown et al., "Conditional likelihood maximisation: A unifying framework for information theoretic feature selection," J. Mach. Learn. Res., vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 27-66, 2012.
17. M. Holst et al., "Development of auditory evoked fields in human fetuses and newborns: A longitudinal MEG study," Clinical Neurophysiol., vol. 116, no. 8, pp. 1949-1955, 2005.
18. U. Ulusar et al., "Adaptive rule based fetal QRS complex detection using hilbert transform," in Proc. Annu. Int. Conf. IEEE Eng. Med. Biol. Soc., 2009, pp. 4666-4669.
19. A. Agresti, CategoricalData Analysis. NewYork, NU, USA:Wiley, 2013.
20. N. Kwak and C.-H. Choi, "Input feature selection by mutual information based on Parzen window," IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell., vol. 24, no. 12, pp. 1667-1671, Dec. 2002.