The Scientific World Journal / 2014 / Article / Tab 2

Research Article

Dual Adaptive Filtering by Optimal Projection Applied to Filter Muscle Artifacts on EEG and Comparative Study

Table 2

Blinded expert comparison of DAFOP and CCA filtering.

Comparison ofSign testDetails valueConclusionSignificance

Electromyogram elimination (all levels of artifacts)Two-sidedDAFOP is better on 31 pages; CCA is better on 15 pages; same level on 67 pages.DAFOP has more often better electromyogriam eliminationSignificant
Cerebral signal elimination (all cerebral signals of the study)Two-sidedDAFOP is better on 30 signals, CCA is better on 7 signals; same level on 142 signals.DAFOP has more often better cerebral signal conservationHighly significant
 Alpha rhythm elimination Two-sidedDAFOP is better on 12 signals, CCA is better on 1 signal; same level on 58 signals.DAFOP has more often better Alpha rhythm conservationHighly significant
 Spike elimination Two-sidedDAFOP is better on 5 signals, CCA is better on 6 signals; same level on 38 signals.DAFOP and CCA spike conservation seem similarNot significant
 Spike-wave elimination Two-sidedDAFOP is better on 10 signals, CCA is better on 0 signal; same level on 24 signals.DAFOP has more often better spike-wave conservationHighly significant
 Epileptic rhythmic
 discharge elimination
Two-sidedDAFOP is better on 3 signals, CCA is better on 0 signals; same level on 12 signals.DAFOP has better epileptic rhythmic discharge conservationNot significant

Quality of filtering by pages, all criteria balancedOne sidedDAFOP is better on 58 pages; CCA is better on 33 pages; same quality on 23 pages.DAFOP is more often judged better than CCA when balancing all criteriaHighly Significant