Abstract
Electromyographic (EMG) signals are usually acquired using surface electrodes, and they commonly serve as the control sources of myoelectric prosthetic limbs. The use of passive electrodes and amplifiers with adjustable gain is very popular in laboratories for the development of new control strategies. However, active electrodes without conductive jelly are used in most clinical applications of myoelectric hand control. There remains an important question: Are there any differences between using active and passive electrodes in EMG pattern classifications? Autoregressive and cepstral coefficients were used to evaluate recognition rates via both types of electrodes. The results showed that the estimated recognition rates in the passive electrodes were comparable to those in the active ones (averaged recognition rate, 88.5 vs. 85.84% in the autoregressive coefficients, and 84.84 vs. 83.5%, in the cepstral coefficients, respectively). Aside from the lack of significant statistical differences between them, the results imply that the differences between the recognition rates via these electrodes could be negligible. This would be helpful for the myoelectric control of assistive devices.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 605-610 |
| Number of pages | 6 |
| Journal | Medical Engineering and Physics |
| Volume | 26 |
| Issue number | 7 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Sep 2004 |
Fingerprint
Keywords
- Active electrode
- EMG
- Passive electrode
- Pattern classification
- Surface myoelectric signal
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
- Psychology(all)
Cite this
The comparison of electromyographic pattern classifications with active and passive electrodes. / Chiou, Ying Han; Luh, Jer Junn; Chen, Shih Ching; Lai, Jin Shin; Kuo, Te Son.
In: Medical Engineering and Physics, Vol. 26, No. 7, 09.2004, p. 605-610.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - The comparison of electromyographic pattern classifications with active and passive electrodes
AU - Chiou, Ying Han
AU - Luh, Jer Junn
AU - Chen, Shih Ching
AU - Lai, Jin Shin
AU - Kuo, Te Son
PY - 2004/9
Y1 - 2004/9
N2 - Electromyographic (EMG) signals are usually acquired using surface electrodes, and they commonly serve as the control sources of myoelectric prosthetic limbs. The use of passive electrodes and amplifiers with adjustable gain is very popular in laboratories for the development of new control strategies. However, active electrodes without conductive jelly are used in most clinical applications of myoelectric hand control. There remains an important question: Are there any differences between using active and passive electrodes in EMG pattern classifications? Autoregressive and cepstral coefficients were used to evaluate recognition rates via both types of electrodes. The results showed that the estimated recognition rates in the passive electrodes were comparable to those in the active ones (averaged recognition rate, 88.5 vs. 85.84% in the autoregressive coefficients, and 84.84 vs. 83.5%, in the cepstral coefficients, respectively). Aside from the lack of significant statistical differences between them, the results imply that the differences between the recognition rates via these electrodes could be negligible. This would be helpful for the myoelectric control of assistive devices.
AB - Electromyographic (EMG) signals are usually acquired using surface electrodes, and they commonly serve as the control sources of myoelectric prosthetic limbs. The use of passive electrodes and amplifiers with adjustable gain is very popular in laboratories for the development of new control strategies. However, active electrodes without conductive jelly are used in most clinical applications of myoelectric hand control. There remains an important question: Are there any differences between using active and passive electrodes in EMG pattern classifications? Autoregressive and cepstral coefficients were used to evaluate recognition rates via both types of electrodes. The results showed that the estimated recognition rates in the passive electrodes were comparable to those in the active ones (averaged recognition rate, 88.5 vs. 85.84% in the autoregressive coefficients, and 84.84 vs. 83.5%, in the cepstral coefficients, respectively). Aside from the lack of significant statistical differences between them, the results imply that the differences between the recognition rates via these electrodes could be negligible. This would be helpful for the myoelectric control of assistive devices.
KW - Active electrode
KW - EMG
KW - Passive electrode
KW - Pattern classification
KW - Surface myoelectric signal
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=3242684380&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=3242684380&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.medengphy.2004.04.001
DO - 10.1016/j.medengphy.2004.04.001
M3 - Article
C2 - 15271288
AN - SCOPUS:3242684380
VL - 26
SP - 605
EP - 610
JO - Medical Engineering and Physics
JF - Medical Engineering and Physics
SN - 1350-4533
IS - 7
ER -