[Eeglablist] Question regarding ICA

[Tarik S Bel-Bahar]

yes, periods that are not of cognitive interest should be removed,
and ICA is generally agnostic about
whether the data is epoched or continuous.
yes, there have been various conversations on this topic in the list.

On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 4:29 AM, Davide Baldo <davidebaldo84 at gmail.com>wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> I was wondering about the following problem:
>
> Assume that your experiment has 2 blocks each with 30 Trials (just a
> random numbers). The experiment is divided into 2 blocks in order to give a
> break to the subject at the end of the first block of 30 trials.
> The EEG data during the break will probably be full of any kinds of
> artifacts.
>
> My question is the following: Regarding ICA, what do you do with the EEG
> data recording during the break time? I mean, do you use the complete EEG
> signal to run ICA (including the data recorded during the break time) or do
> you remove the noise data recording during the break?
>
> The point is: if you do not remove that data, then you have a continuous
> signal as input to ICA.
>                    If you do remove that data, you remove a lot of noise,
> but you add a discontinuity in the data you use to run ICA (because you
> must cut the data recorded during the break and join together the remaining
> data)
>
> Thus...is it better to remove that part of the data or not?
>
> Does my question make sense? :)
>
> Thanks in advance for your kind help,
>
>
> Davide.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Eeglablist page: http://sccn.ucsd.edu/eeglab/eeglabmail.html
> To unsubscribe, send an empty email to
> eeglablist-unsubscribe at sccn.ucsd.edu
> For digest mode, send an email with the subject "set digest mime" to
> eeglablist-request at sccn.ucsd.edu
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sccn.ucsd.edu/pipermail/eeglablist/attachments/20120925/1ce55c44/attachment.html>