[Eeglablist] Removal of ocular artifact from EEG using ICA

[Scott Makeig]

It is better to take all 32 channels, since (1) you might have missed some
influence of eye movments on the remaining channels, and (2) ICA can use the
information in the other channels to better separate non-eye movement (EEG)
signals from the eye-movement signals. Using 32 channels meaning learning a
32^2 weight matrix, so you should use at least many thousand data points to
obtain best results.

Scott Makeig


On 6/16/06, KRISHNAVENI THIRUMURTHY <venimurthy at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>  Dear Sir,
>
> I am working with ICA algorithms for removing ocular artifacts from EEG. I
> have downloaded the data from
>
> http://www.sccn.ucsd.edu/~arno/famzdata/publicly_available_EEG_data.html
>
> EOG interference will be dominant in the EEG recorded from the electrodes
> placed on the patient's forehead. Hence, samples from the frontal channels
> are taken for analysis. I have taken 10 frontal channels and fed that as
> input to ICA algorithm and from the independent components obtained, ocular
> artifacts are identified and removed from the original data.
>
> My question is,
>
> Since the recorded signals are assumed to be linear combination of all the
> source signals, should i take all the 32 channels for my analysis, or is it
> sufficient to take only 10 frontal channel recordings for my analysis.
>
> Kindly help me in this regard.
>
> with regards,
> Krishnaveni
>
> **
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> eeglablist mailing list eeglablist at sccn.ucsd.edu
> Eeglablist page: http://sccn.ucsd.edu/eeglab/eeglabmail.html
> To unsubscribe, send an empty email to
> eeglablist-unsubscribe at sccn.ucsd.edu
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sccn.ucsd.edu/pipermail/eeglablist/attachments/20060617/c8ae4edf/attachment.html>