<div dir="ltr">Dear Bin,<div><br></div><div>See the following wiki to find out how we think of ICA and data rejection.<br><div><br></div><div><a href="http://sccn.ucsd.edu/wiki/Makoto's_preprocessing_pipeline">http://sccn.ucsd.edu/wiki/Makoto's_preprocessing_pipeline</a><br></div></div><div><br></div><div>The point is that as long as you follow EEGLAB STUDY pipeline for the group-level analysis, you don't need to bother to reject ICs manually since it is inefficient and arbitrary.</div><div><br></div><div>Makoto</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 12:36 PM, Bin Wang <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:binwang87828@gmail.com" target="_blank">binwang87828@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style="word-wrap:break-word"><div>Hi, Makoto,</div><div><br></div><div>Thank you very much. You are right. </div><div><br></div><div>I am using a dataset with 64 channels. Normally I can get 64 ICs, so if I removed 20 artefact-ICs, I still have about 40 ICs that are confirmed to be brain activity, which is totally reasonable. As long as I can make sure that these 20 IC are related with artefacts, I can remove them and won’t remove much of my data variance. Am I right?</div><div><br></div><div>Bin </div><div><br></div><br><div>
<div style="color:rgb(0,0,0);letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;word-wrap:break-word"><div style="color:rgb(0,0,0);letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;word-wrap:break-word"><font face="arial,helvetica,sans-serif" size="1" color="#0B5394">++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++</font><font face="arial,helvetica,sans-serif" size="1" color="#0B5394"><br></font><span style="font-family:Tahoma;font-size:13px"></span><div style="font-family:Tahoma;font-size:13px"><font color="#0B5394">Bin Wang</font><font color="#0B5394"><br>Cognitive Neuroscience</font><font color="#0B5394"><br>Institute of Neuroscience and Medicine (INM-3)</font><font color="#0B5394"><br>Forschungszentrum Juelich, </font><font color="#0B5394"><br>Leo-Brandt-Str. 5 </font><font color="#0B5394"><br>52425 Juelich</font><font face="arial" color="#0B5394"><br></font><font color="#0B5394">Email: </font><a href="https://webmail.fz-juelich.de/owa/redir.aspx?C=hswxAlx8wU6cP189jFS_1w0PFSKb8dAIIkV6dqtR-VUUMNMIisKisV7RZADeuZK3wPR2w27Q5yU.&URL=mailto%3abinwang87828%40gmail.com" target="_blank"><font>b.wang@fz-juelich.de</font></a><font color="#0B5394"><br> </font><font face="Calibri,sans-serif" color="#1F497D"><span lang="de" style="font-size:11pt">&</span></font><font color="#0B5394"> </font><a href="https://webmail.fz-juelich.de/owa/redir.aspx?C=hswxAlx8wU6cP189jFS_1w0PFSKb8dAIIkV6dqtR-VUUMNMIisKisV7RZADeuZK3wPR2w27Q5yU.&URL=mailto%3abinwang87828%40gmail.com" target="_blank"><font>binwang87828@gmail.com</font></a><a href="https://webmail.fz-juelich.de/owa/redir.aspx?C=hswxAlx8wU6cP189jFS_1w0PFSKb8dAIIkV6dqtR-VUUMNMIisKisV7RZADeuZK3wPR2w27Q5yU.&URL=mailto%3abinwang87828%40gmail.com" target="_blank"><font><font face="Calibri,sans-serif" color="#1F497D"><span lang="de" style="font-size:11pt"> </span></font></font></a><font color="#0B5394"><br></font><font color="#0B5394">Telefon: 02461-61-9542</font><div><font face="arial,helvetica,sans-serif" size="1" color="#0B5394">++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++</font></div></div></div><br></div><br><br>
</div><div><div class="h5">
<br><div><blockquote type="cite"><div>On 04 Nov 2014, at 21:11, Makoto Miyakoshi <<a href="mailto:mmiyakoshi@ucsd.edu" target="_blank">mmiyakoshi@ucsd.edu</a>> wrote:</div><br><div><div dir="ltr">Dear Bin,<div><br></div><div>We only use up to around 20 ICs that is confirmed to be brain EEGs regardless of the channel number.</div><div><br></div><div>By the way you can't say how many IC removal is appropriate. If you remove IC1-10 then you'll remove more than 50% of your data variance, while if you remove IC90-100 it could be less than 1%.</div><div><br></div><div>Makoto</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 1:22 PM, Bin Wang <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:binwang87828@gmail.com" target="_blank">binwang87828@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style="word-wrap:break-word"><div>Hi, everyone,</div><div><br></div><div>One simple question: I am using ICA to remove the artefact right now. How many removed components is reasonable? I am using a completely automatic algorithm (ADJUST) now. It seems work for most of subjects. But, it is wired for one subject, I need remove 20 components of 60. Is it reasonable? </div><div><br></div><div>Thank you in advance,</div><div>Bin</div>
<div title="Page 2">
<div>
<div><p><br></p></div></div></div><div><br>
</div>
<br></div><br>_______________________________________________<br>
Eeglablist page: <a href="http://sccn.ucsd.edu/eeglab/eeglabmail.html" target="_blank">http://sccn.ucsd.edu/eeglab/eeglabmail.html</a><br>
To unsubscribe, send an empty email to <a href="mailto:eeglablist-unsubscribe@sccn.ucsd.edu" target="_blank">eeglablist-unsubscribe@sccn.ucsd.edu</a><br>
For digest mode, send an email with the subject "set digest mime" to <a href="mailto:eeglablist-request@sccn.ucsd.edu" target="_blank">eeglablist-request@sccn.ucsd.edu</a><br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div><div dir="ltr">Makoto Miyakoshi<br>Swartz Center for Computational Neuroscience<br>Institute for Neural Computation, University of California San Diego<br></div></div>
</div>
</div></blockquote></div><br></div></div></div></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr">Makoto Miyakoshi<br>Swartz Center for Computational Neuroscience<br>Institute for Neural Computation, University of California San Diego<br></div></div>
</div>