[Eeglablist] binica old-Win Verison

Jason Palmer japalmer29 at gmail.com
Wed Apr 16 17:21:54 PDT 2014

Hi Johannes,


Binica is fine if it is working for what you are doing. It uses the Extended
Infomax algorithm, which, given reasonable preprocessing, produces results
very similar to other ICA algorithms (see Delorme et al, PLoS One, 2012 for
comparisons). So if you are successfully processing and exploiting
information in ICs derived from binica, then it may be perfectly advisable.
Differences in algorithms usuallly come down to slight differences in
(relatively high) SNRs of extracted signals. So it is like listening to a
lecture recorded with a good tape recorder vs high quality microphone
digital recording-if you only want to know what the lecturer said, then
either is sufficient, but if you are interested in small amplitude signals
like students shuffling papers or cell phones ringing, or very subtle vocal
inflections of the speake,r then higher quality recording may be advisable.





From: eeglablist-bounces at sccn.ucsd.edu
[mailto:eeglablist-bounces at sccn.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Rentzsch, Johannes
Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2014 6:31 AM
To: eeglablist at sccn.ucsd.edu
Subject: [Eeglablist] binica old-Win Verison




I have a question regarding the "old" Windows-binica Version which I use for
IC decomposition.

Is it inadvisable to use this version?


Best Thanks, Johannes




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sccn.ucsd.edu/pipermail/eeglablist/attachments/20140416/56e83218/attachment.html>

More information about the eeglablist mailing list