Author Affiliations
College of Electronic Information Engineering, Hebei University, Baoding, Hebei 071002, Chinashow less
Fig. 1. fNIRS signal preprocessing flowchart using tMedMor algorithm
Fig. 2. Flow chart of Mor algorithm
Fig. 3. Unilateral power spectral density of noiseless OD signal
Fig. 4. Unilateral power spectral density of noiseless OD signal
Fig. 5. Waveform of simulation data after using tMedMor algorithm, the data in the figure was selected from OD signal with a wavelength of 830 nm in a certain channel. (a) OD signals contaminated by motion artifacts; (b) OD signal corrected by tMed algorithm; (c) OD signal corrected by Mor algorithm; (d) comparing OD signal corrected by tMedMor algorithm with OD signal without motion artifacts
Fig. 6. Evaluation indices calculated after correcting motion artifacts of simulated block-average HbO signal with different algorithms. (a) EMS; (b) RSN; (c) R2; (d) Ep
Fig. 7. Waveform of real data after using tMedMor algorithm, the data in the figure was selected from OD signal with a wavelength of 830 nm in a certain channel. (a) OD signals contaminated by motion artifacts; (b) OD signal corrected by tMed method; (c) OD signal corrected by Mor algorithm; (d) comparing OD signal corrected by tMedMor algorithm with OD signal without motion artifacts
Fig. 8. Evaluation indices calculated after correcting motion artifacts of true block-average HbO signal with different algorithms. (a) EMS; (b) RSN; (c) R2; (d) Ep
Method | /10-15 | /dB | R2 | Ep |
---|
Uncorrected | 3561.7±3182.1 | -24.57±3.81 | 0.53±0.42 | 29136.8±43210.4 | MARA | 498.5±666.6 | -14.34±6.04 | 0.74±0.25 | 3933.7±4644.9 | TDDR | 38.4±24.4 | -5.44±2.45 | 0.75±0.24 | 265.9±228.4 | Spline-SG | 125.3±110.1 | -9.67±4.97 | 0.68±0.27 | 1468.9±2258.0 | kWavelet | 1704.5±1414.4 | -19.97±6.40 | 0.49±0.29 | 17613.0±27820.8 | tPCA | 3611.4±3844.7 | -24.24±3.89 | 0.57±0.36 | 27700.4±31193.8 | Mor | 26.5±34.3 | -0.50±7.01 | 0.63±0.37 | 227.9±381.3 | tMed | 3618.8±3917.1 | -23.95±4.22 | 0.40±0.36 | 28697.4±50120.2 | tMedMor | 6.9±4.9 | 3.18±5.25 | 0.74±0.26 | 60.5±78.0 |
|
Table 1. EMS, RSN, R2 and Ep of simulated block-average HbO signal after processing by different algorithms
Method | /10-14 | /dB | R2 | Ep |
---|
Uncorrected | 3006.9±2588.0 | -23.68±4.35 | 0.44±0.32 | 20714.2±19455.8 | MARA | 76.4±72.5 | -6.01±7.19 | 0.77±0.20 | 603.6±640.7 | TDDR | 11.9±13.5 | 1.60±5.74 | 0.88±0.12 | 83.4±91.5 | Spline-SG | 23.6±30.4 | -1.37±5.31 | 0.86±0.10 | 170.1±206.3 | kWavelet | 95.2±98.7 | -7.44±6.12 | 0.50±0.33 | 566.7±622.3 | tPCA | 78.3±78.6 | -6.66±6.05 | 0.74±0.19 | 613.8±777.0 | Mor | 1.7±1.5 | 8.21±3.43 | 0.83±0.17 | 8.2±14.9 | tMed | 2992.4±2580.1 | -23.67±4.32 | 0.44±0.32 | 20270.2±19240.6 | tMedMor | 1.6±1.4 | 8.66±3.29 | 0.85±0.16 | 5.1±6.6 |
|
Table 2. EMS, RSN, R2 and Ep of real block-average HbO signal after processing by different algorithms