[Eeglablist] Dear list, about line noise.

Thu Apr 15 10:13:25 PDT 2021

Dear Makoto,

I have a bit of confusion on how the two approaches deal with stationary noise.

Being based on spatial filtering the ZapLine approach can only deal with the stationary part of the noise.

The CleanLine approach is non-stationary as it is based on a sliding windows, hence there is no prior-assumption about stationarity. However, any residual activity here would still be non-stationary.

If my understanding is correct, if one or the other approach is applied before, some non-stationary residual would still remain, although reduced by the application of CleanLine.

Based on this, the method which is applied as second will have to deal with a reduced amount of stationary noise, and the final output should not depend much on in which order the methods are applied.

Does my reasoning sound sensible? Please let me know if any of my thoughts is inaccurate.

Many thanks again for your help.

Kind regards,
Ramtin

-----Original Message-----
From: eeglablist <eeglablist-bounces at sccn.ucsd.edu> On Behalf Of Makoto Miyakoshi via eeglablist
Sent: giovedì 15 aprile 2021 00:22
To: eeglablist at sccn.ucsd.edu
Subject: Re: [Eeglablist] Dear list, about line noise.

Dear Ramtin,

> Although you specifically suggest the use of CleanLine after ZapLine, 
> I
was wondering whether the opposite makes any difference.

Interesting question.
The residual line noise after CleanLine is probably non-stationary (because CleanLine uses a sliding window approach). Because ZapLine makes an assumption of stationarity, I thought ZapLine may not be able to deal with it very well. But strictly speaking, ZapLine's performance there of course depends on the stationarity of the residual line noise.

If you are interested, you may want to run the test. Both methods are published, so it is just a matter of time.
And if you find my prediction is wrong, please do let me know! I'm very curious.

Thank you for your interest Ramtin.

Makoto

On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 6:04 AM Ramtin Mehraram <ramtin.mehraram at kuleuven.be>
wrote:

> Dear Makoto,
>
> I see that you recommend in that paper a combined usage of ZapLine and 
> CleanLine for optimal results. Although you specifically suggest the 
> use of CleanLine after ZapLine, I was wondering whether the opposite 
> makes any difference.
>
>
> Thank you in advance for your help.
>
> Kind regards,
> Ramtin
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: eeglablist <eeglablist-bounces at sccn.ucsd.edu> On Behalf Of 
> Makoto Miyakoshi via eeglablist
> Sent: martedì 16 marzo 2021 17:47
> To: EEGLAB List <eeglablist at sccn.ucsd.edu>
> Subject: Re: [Eeglablist] Dear list, about line noise.
>
> ⚠ External sender. Take care when opening links or attachments. Do not 
> provide your login details.
>
> Dear Hsin-An and Meha,
>
> Here is the recently published comparison between CleanLine
> (cleanLineNoise) and ZapLine.
>
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook
> .com/?url=https*3A*2F*2Furldefense.com*2Fv3*2F__https*3A*2F*2Fpubmed.n
> cbi.nlm.nih.gov*2F33584237*2F__*3B!!Mih3wA!SNPuomg5uPwruRY1ELie8uo9D7P
> fRRhCS9Sdb3sznjFPoh_hJ_-ID3V4-enETszcFZ_OiQ*24&data=04*7C01*7CR.Me
> hraram2*40newcastle.ac.uk*7C6f0001c617114b813b9808d8e89c1437*7C9c5012c
> 9b61644c2a91766814fbe3e87*7C1*7C0*7C637515104334719474*7CUnknown*7CTWF
> pbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6M
> n0*3D*7C1000&sdata=k1vBHH73jDERLO*2FHhc7LVcGBx2P9N7A1BP*2BwCGBHgZU
> *3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUl!!Mih3wA!UK4M
> zzIQgUArd5inHE3ocME5_O0L_DLA7L0j7wH6B6XfllYAb3xzne9F7yPdxefpmg$
>
> I think CleanLine is good for general purposes if you need to retain 
> the original signal in the line noise frequency range. The assumption 
> here is that line noise has much slower time constant to modulate amplitude (i.e.
> line-noise signal nvelope) than the genuine EEG signal. The same goal 
> can be achieved by ZapLine if the spatial filter of the line noise is 
> stationary, but this assumption is less likely.
>
> Makoto
>
> On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 8:40 AM Meha Fatima via eeglablist < 
> eeglablist at sccn.ucsd.edu> wrote:
>
> > Dear Chang,
> >
> > I have found Cleanline very useful for 60 Hz line noise removal, so 
> > you can try it :)
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sun, 14 Mar 2021 at 23:54, <chang.ha at msa.hinet.net> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Dear list,
> > >
> > >
> > > Which is the most effective plugin to remove line noise (i.e., 60Hz)?
> > >
> > > Filter the data (Basic FIR filter, new default) - Notch filter the 
> > > data instead of pass band?
> > >
> > > Cleanline?
> > >
> > > PREP pipeline?
> > >
> > > Or any other plugin?
> > >
> > > Thanks.
> > >
> > >
> > > Hsin-An Chang  M.D.
> > >
> > > Tri-Service General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Eeglablist page:
> > >
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook
> .com/?url=http*3A*2F*2Fscc__;JSUl!!Mih3wA!UK4MzzIQgUArd5inHE3ocME5_O0L
> _DLA7L0j7wH6B6XfllYAb3xzne9F7yMNuQP9EA$
> > > n.ucsd.edu%2Feeglab%2Feeglabmail.html&data=04%7C01%7CR.Mehrara
> > > m2
> > > %40newcastle.ac.uk%7C6f0001c617114b813b9808d8e89c1437%7C9c5012c9b6
> > > 16 
> > > 44c2a91766814fbe3e87%7C1%7C0%7C637515104334719474%7CUnknown%7CTWFp
> > > bG 
> > > Zsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6
> > > Mn 
> > > 0%3D%7C1000&sdata=USyHTXMXUeJvrCLjvIDf7JxkFbUDjifrjFRRQyLDKUc%
> > > 3D
> > > &reserved=0 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
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > *  Dr. Meha Fatima BSMT, Ph.D.*
> >                                          Assistant Professor
> >                                          Dow Institute of Medical 
> > Technology
> >                                          Dow University of Health
> Sciences
> >                                           *mehafatima1 at gmail.com
> > <mehafatima1 at gmail.com>.*
> > _______________________________________________
> > Eeglablist page:
> >
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook
> .com/?url=http*3A*2F*2Fsccn__;JSUl!!Mih3wA!UK4MzzIQgUArd5inHE3ocME5_O0
> L_DLA7L0j7wH6B6XfllYAb3xzne9F7yN_ZgT5Vw$
> .
> > ucsd.edu%2Feeglab%2Feeglabmail.html&data=04%7C01%7CR.Mehraram2%4
> > 0n
> > ewcastle.ac.uk%7C6f0001c617114b813b9808d8e89c1437%7C9c5012c9b61644c2
> > a9 
> > 1766814fbe3e87%7C1%7C0%7C637515104334719474%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8
> > ey
> > JWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1
> > 00 
> > 0&sdata=USyHTXMXUeJvrCLjvIDf7JxkFbUDjifrjFRRQyLDKUc%3D&reser
> > ve
> > d=0 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
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Eeglablist page:
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook
> .com/?url=http*3A*2F*2Fsccn.ucsd.edu*2Feeglab*2Feeglabmail.html&da
> ta=04*7C01*7CR.Mehraram2*40newcastle.ac.uk*7C6f0001c617114b813b9808d8e
> 89c1437*7C9c5012c9b61644c2a91766814fbe3e87*7C1*7C0*7C63751510433472942
> 9*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6
> Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0*3D*7C1000&sdata=sawUZo2GNZ324fwbobgGVFp*2FemjY
> J*2FnPHeqwZcDFYFQ*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSU!!Mih
> 3wA!UK4MzzIQgUArd5inHE3ocME5_O0L_DLA7L0j7wH6B6XfllYAb3xzne9F7yOZ4SGK3A
> $ 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
>
_______________________________________________
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