Review Article
Review on EEG-Based Authentication Technology
Table 3
Shallow classification methods for EEG authentication.
| Researchers | Tasks | Feature extraction | Classification | Accuracy (%) |
| Kong et al. [65] | MI | Node degree of brain network | LDA | 99.1 | DRI mental task | 99.3 |
| Salem et al. [41] | MANHOB-HCI VEP | CNN | SVM | 99.99 | Seha et al. [52] | Listening | CCA | LDA | 96.46 | Wu et al. [34] | FRSVP VEP | Fisher LDA and logistic regression | HDCA | 91.46 | Koike-Akino et al. [35] | ERP | PCA and partial least squares | LDA | 96.70 | Brigham et al. [47] | Imagined speech | AR | SVM | 99.76 | Jayarathne et al. [66] | Listening + VEP + ERP | CSP | LDA | 96.97 | Keshishzadeh et al. [51] | Resting state | AR | SVM | 97.43 | Thomas et al. [31] | Resting state | Individual alpha frequency (IAF) delta band power (DBP) | Cross-correlation values and Mahalanobis distance | 90 | Bashar et al. [42] | Resting state | MSD, WPES | ECOC-SVM | 94.44 | Gui et al. [17] | VEP | WPD | ANN | 90 | Pham et al. [46] | MI | AR, PSD | SVDD | 99.90 | Zeynali et al. [67] | Mental task | DFT, DWT, AR | BN | 85.97 | SVM | 84.49 |
| Wu et al. [34] | RSVP | Fisher LDA | HDCA with genetic algorithm | 94.26 |
|
|