TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparison of Particle Filter to Established Filtering Methods in Electromyography Biofeedback
AU - Lyu, Mingxing
AU - Lambelet, Charles
AU - Woolley, Daniel
AU - Zhang, Xue
AU - Chen, Weihai
AU - Ding, Xilun
AU - Gassert, Roger
AU - Wenderoth, Nicole
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 Elsevier Ltd
PY - 2020/7
Y1 - 2020/7
N2 - Objective: Surface electromyography (sEMG) is a potentially useful signal that can provide therapeutic biofeedback. However, sEMG signal processing is difficult because of the low signal-to-noise ratio and non-stationarity of the raw signal. Conventional online filters often suffer from a compromise between smoothness and responsiveness. Here we propose a new particle filtering method for sEMG processing and compare it to established filtering methods. Methods: A wrist apparatus measuring isometric wrist extension/flexion force was developed. Six filters (moving average windowing (MAW), adaptive-MAW, 3-layer, Kalman, Bayes and particle filters) were tested on forearm sEMG collected with a Myo armband. Fourteen subjects performed two visuomotor tracking tasks (square and sine wave tracking). Tracking error, measured as the root mean square error (RMSE2), was used as a metric to compare the influence of different filters on overall performance. Results: For sine wave tracking tasks (representing continuous trajectory control), the particle filter (RMSE2: 53.30 ± 15.69 pixels) had the lowest tracking error. For the square wave tracking task (representing discrete endpoint control), the Bayes filter (RMSE2: 37.82 ± 23.53 pixels) had the lowest tracking error. With respect to computational requirements, the Kalman filter was the most efficient. Conclusion: Our results indicate that the filter requirements for sEMG controllers are task specific, but the new particle filtering method presented here represents a good compromise for the different types of motor control tested here. Significance: The particle filter has the potential to improve sEMG based therapeutic biofeedback.
AB - Objective: Surface electromyography (sEMG) is a potentially useful signal that can provide therapeutic biofeedback. However, sEMG signal processing is difficult because of the low signal-to-noise ratio and non-stationarity of the raw signal. Conventional online filters often suffer from a compromise between smoothness and responsiveness. Here we propose a new particle filtering method for sEMG processing and compare it to established filtering methods. Methods: A wrist apparatus measuring isometric wrist extension/flexion force was developed. Six filters (moving average windowing (MAW), adaptive-MAW, 3-layer, Kalman, Bayes and particle filters) were tested on forearm sEMG collected with a Myo armband. Fourteen subjects performed two visuomotor tracking tasks (square and sine wave tracking). Tracking error, measured as the root mean square error (RMSE2), was used as a metric to compare the influence of different filters on overall performance. Results: For sine wave tracking tasks (representing continuous trajectory control), the particle filter (RMSE2: 53.30 ± 15.69 pixels) had the lowest tracking error. For the square wave tracking task (representing discrete endpoint control), the Bayes filter (RMSE2: 37.82 ± 23.53 pixels) had the lowest tracking error. With respect to computational requirements, the Kalman filter was the most efficient. Conclusion: Our results indicate that the filter requirements for sEMG controllers are task specific, but the new particle filtering method presented here represents a good compromise for the different types of motor control tested here. Significance: The particle filter has the potential to improve sEMG based therapeutic biofeedback.
KW - Adaptive
KW - Bayes filter
KW - Biofeedback
KW - Electromyography (EMG)
KW - Kalman filter
KW - Moving average windowing
KW - Particle filter
KW - Surface electromyography (sEMG)
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85084253520
U2 - 10.1016/j.bspc.2020.101949
DO - 10.1016/j.bspc.2020.101949
M3 - 文章
AN - SCOPUS:85084253520
SN - 1746-8094
VL - 60
JO - Biomedical Signal Processing and Control
JF - Biomedical Signal Processing and Control
M1 - 101949
ER -