(IJACSA) International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications,

Vol. 5, No. 4, 2014

EEG Mouse:A Machine Learning-Based Brain

Computer Interface
Mohammad H. Alomari, Ayman AbuBaker, Aiman Turani, Ali M. Baniyounes, Adnan Manasreh
Electrical and Computer Engineering Department, Applied Science University
P.O. Box 166, Amman 11931 Jordan

AbstractThe main idea of the current work is to use a

wireless Electroencephalography (EEG) headset as a remote
control for the mouse cursor of a personal computer. The
proposed system uses EEG signals as a communication link
between brains and computers. Signal records obtained from the
PhysioNet EEG dataset were analyzed using the Coif lets
wavelets and many features were extracted using different
amplitude estimators for the wavelet coefficients. The extracted
features were inputted into machine learning algorithms to
generate the decision rules required for our application. The
suggested real time implementation of the system was tested and
very good performance was achieved. This system could be
helpful for disabled people as they can control computer
applications via the imagination of fists and feet movements in
addition to closing eyes for a short period of time.
KeywordsEEG; BCI; Data Mining; Machine Learning;
SVMs; NNs; DWT; Feature Extraction

I. INTRODUCTION
Brain-Computer Interface (BCI) is a device that enables the
use of the brains neural activity to communicate with others or
to control machines, artificial limbs, or robots without direct
physical movements [1-4]. As computerized systems are
becoming one of the main tools for making peoples lives
easier and with the ongoing growth in the BCI field, it is
becoming more important to understand brain waves and
analyze EEG signals. Electroencephalography (EEG) is the
process of measuring the brains neural activity as electrical
voltage fluctuations along the scalp as a result of the current
flows in brains neurons [5]. The brains electrical activity is
monitored and recorded, in typical EEG tests, using electrodes
that are fixed on the scalp [6]. BCI captures EEG signals in
conjunction with a specific user activity then uses different
signal processing algorithms to translate these records into
control commands for different machine and computer
applications [7].
BCI was known for its popular use in helping disabled
individuals by providing a new channel of communication with
the external environment and offering a feasible tool to control
artificial limbs [8]. A variety of BCI applications were
described in[9] including the control of devices using the
translation of thoughts into commands in video games and
personal computers. BCI is a highly interdisciplinary research
topic that combines medicine, neurology, psychology,
rehabilitation engineering, Human-Computer Interaction
(HCI), signal processing and machine learning [10].

In our previous research [11-13] we proposed many

systems that could efficiently discriminate between executed
(or imagined) left and right fist (or feet) movements. In this
work, we integrated these systems into one hybrid application
that is based on the imagined fists and feet movements.
II.

LITERATURE REVIEW

The translation approach used to transform EEG signal

patterns into machine commands reflects the strength of BCI
applications. In [14], the authors recorded EEG signals for
three subjects while imagining either right or left hand
movement based on a visual cue stimulus. They were able to
classify EEG signals into right and left hand movements using
a neural network classifier with an accuracy of 80% and
concluded that this accuracy did not improve with increasing
number of sessions.
The authors of[15] used features produced by Motor
Imagery (MI) to control a robot arm. Features such as the band
power in specific frequency bands (alpha: 8-12Hz and beta: 1330Hz) were mapped into right and left limb movements. In
addition, they used similar features with MI, which are the
Event Related Resynchronization and Synchronization
(ERD/ERS) comparing the signals energy in specific
frequency bands with respect to the mentally relaxed state.
The combination of ERD/ERS and Movement-Related
Cortical Potentials (MRCP) was proven to improve the
classification of EEG signals as this offers an independent and
complimentary information [13, 16]. The authors of
[17]presented an approach for the classification of single trial
MRCP using a discrete dyadic wavelet transform and Support
Vector Machines (SVMs) and they provided a promising
classification performance.
A single trial right/left hand movement classification is
reported in [18]. The authors analyzed both executed and
imagined hand movement EEG signals and created a feature
vector consisting of the ERD/ERS patterns of the mu and beta
rhythms and the coefficients of the autoregressive model.
Artificial Neural Networks (ANNs) is applied to two kinds of
testing datasets and an average recognition rate of 93% is
achieved.
A three-class BCI system was presented in [19] for the
translation of imagined left/right hands and foot movements
into commands that operates a wheelchair. This work used
many spatial patterns of ERD on mu rhythms along the
sensory-motor cortex and the resulting classification accuracy

193 | P a g e
www.ijacsa.thesai.org

(IJACSA) International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications,

Vol. 5, No. 4, 2014

for online and offline tests was 79.48% and 85.00%,

respectively. The authors of [20] proposed an EEG-based BCI
system that controls hand prosthesis of paralyzed people by
movement thoughts of left and right hands. They reported an
accuracy of about 90%.
In [21], a hybrid BCI control strategy is presented. The
authors expanded the control functions of a P300 potential
based BCI for virtual devices and MI related sensorimotor
rhythms to navigate in a virtual environment. Imagined
left/right hand movements were translated into movement
commands in a virtual apartment and an extremely high testing
accuracy results were reached.The Daubechies, Coiflet and
Symmlet wavelet families were applied in[22]to a dataset of
MI to extract features and describe right and left hand
movement imagery. The authors reported that the use of Linear
Discriminate Analysis (LDA) and Multilayer Perception
(MLP) Neural Networks (NNs) provided good classification
results and that LDA classifier achieved higher classification
results of up to 88% for different Symmlet wavelets. The
authors of[23]used the discrete wavelet transform (DWT) to
create inputs for a NNs classifier and the authors reported a
very high classification accuracy of 99.87% for the recognition
of some mental tasks.
III. THE PROPOSED SYSTEM
The main idea of the current work is to use a wireless EEG
headset such as the one designed by NeuroSky[24] as a remote
control for the mouse cursor of personal computers and the
computer applications. As depicted in Fig. 1, the captured EEG
signals have to be pre-processed to filter out the unwanted
content and then the content of interest has to be represented
using some features that can be inputted into machine learning
algorithms. The outcome of this process is a collection of
decision rules that can be translated, as required, into PC
commands.

Fig. 1. A block diagram for the suggested system

A. Eeg Data
The PhysioNetEEG dataset [25] is used in this work. It
consists of more than 1500 one or two minutes-duration EEG
records obtained from 109 healthy subjects. Subjects were
asked to execute and imagine different tasks while 64 channels
of EEG signals were recorded from the electrodes that were
fitted along the scalp.
In the records of the dataset that are related to the current
research, each subject performed the following tasks:
One-minute baseline run with eyes open.
One-minute baseline run with eyes closed.
Three two-minutes experimental runs of imagining
moving theright or left fists while the left or right side
of a computer screen is showing a target.

Three two-minute experimental runs of imagining

moving both fists or both feet while the top or bottom
side of a computer screen is showing a target.
The obtained EEG signals were recorded according to the
international 10-20 system as seen in Fig. 2.

Fig. 2. Electrode Positions for the C3, Cz, and C4 channels

For this work, we created a subset for 100 subjects

including 8 runs per subject.
B. Preprocessing
Only channels C3, C4, and Cz were used in our work for
two reasons:(1) It is reported in [6] that most EEG channels
represent redundant information and (2), it was
concludedin[26, 27] that the neural activity that is mostly
correlated to the fists movements is almost exclusively
contained within these channels as depicted in Fig. 2.
The authors of [28] showed thatEEG signals are noisy and
non-stationary signals that have to be filtered to get rid of the
unnecessary content. Hence, the channels C3, C4, and Cz were
filtered, using a band-pass filter (0.5-50 Hz),for the purpose of
removing the DC shifts and minimizing the presence of
filtering artifacts at epoch boundaries.
In [29], it was stated that EEG signals are usually masked
by physiological artifacts that produce huge amounts of useless
data. Eye and muscle movements could be good examples of
these artifacts that constitute a challenge in the field of BCI
research. The Automatic Artifact Removal (AAR) toolbox [30]
was used to process our EEG subset.
A MATLAB script was written to analyze the filtered EEG
signals and it was found that a subject imagines opening and
closing a fist (or both fists/feet) and keeps doing this for 4.1
seconds then he takes a rest for the duration of 4.2 seconds.
This means that each two-minute EEG run includes 15 events
that are separated by a short neutral period where the subject
relaxes. As the Physionet dataset was sampled at 160 samples
per second, each vector includes 656 samples of the original
recorded EEG signal. And because we used the available
records for 100 subjects, our subset included 18000 vectors
representing imagined left fist, right fist, both fists, and both
feet movements. An additional 1500 vectors were extracted
from the one-minute baseline run (with eyes open) and another
1500 vectors from the one-minute baseline run with eyes
closed. So, the total number of extracted samples (events) was
12000 samples.

194 | P a g e
www.ijacsa.thesai.org

(IJACSA) International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications,

Vol. 5, No. 4, 2014

IV.

FEATURE EXTRACTION

A. The Discrete Wavelet Transform

The Wavelet transform analysis was used in a wide range
of research topics within the field of signal processing. Based
on a multi-resolutions process, the wavelet properties of a
scalable window allow pinpointing signal components. These
properties of dilation and translation enable the extraction of all
components for every position by creating different scales and
shifted functions (in time domain) of a signal [31, 32]. As a
result, wavelet finer and large scaling, permit all information of
the signal (the big picture), while small scales shows signal
details by zooming into the signal components.
For discrete data, such as the datasets used in the current
work, the Discrete Wavelet Transform (DWT) is better fit for
analysis. It was shown in [33] that a suitable wavelet function
must be used to optimize the analysis performance. A large
selection of DWT mother wavelets, such as the Daubechies,
Symmlet, and Coif let, is available to be used in our work [22].
But the Coif let(Coif) family of wavelet functions provided the
best classification performance in our previous work [11]. So,
we decided to calculate the Coif lets wavelets Coif1-Coif5 in
this work.
As shown in Fig. 3, the main purpose of the DWT is to
decompose the recorded EEG signal into multi-resolution
subsets of coefficients: a detailed coefficient subset(cDi) and an
approximation coefficient subset (cAi) at theleveli.So, at the
first decomposition level we obtain cD1 and cA1 then the first
approximation cA1 can be transformed into cD2 and cA2 at the
second level, and so on. For our experiments, the
decomposition level was set to generate four level details.

All EEG signals in the subset were sampled at 160Hz. So,

the wavelet transformation of each record at four levels results
in four details: cD1(40-80Hz), cD2(20-40Hz), cD3(10-20Hz),
and cD4(5-10Hz), and a single approximationcA4(0-5Hz). As
explained in [11], the details cD2, cD3and cD4 provided proper
representation for the activities of interest. So, we decided to
extract the vectors of features from these details only.
B. Amplitude Estimators
Many amplitude estimators for neurological activities were
defined mathematically in [34] and some of them were selected
based on our previous results obtained in [11].
If we assume that the nth sample of a wavelet decomposed
detail at level i is Di(n), then the following features can be
defined:
Root Mean Square (RMS)

1 N 2
Di (n)
N n=1

RMSi =

Mean Absolute Value (MAV)

MAVi =

1 N
Di (n)
N n=1

Integrated EEG (IEEG)

N

IEEGi = Di (n)

n=1

Simple Square Integral (SSI)

N

SSI i = Di (n)

n=1

Variance of EEG (VAR)

VARi =

1 N 2
Di (n)
N -1 n=1

Average Amplitude Change (AAC)

Fig. 3. The multi-resolution decomposition of a sample EEG signal.

AACi =

1 N
Di (n +1) - Di (n)
N n=1

C. Feature Vectors
In our experiments, we applied the Coifletswavelets Coif1
to Coif5 for each one of the channels C3, C4, and Cz of an
EEG record. This process was repeated for each event in our
dataset of 12000 vectors.

195 | P a g e
www.ijacsa.thesai.org

(IJACSA) International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications,

Vol. 5, No. 4, 2014

Then, all estimators were calculated using (1) through (6)

for the details cD2, cD3and cD4 of each instance.At the end of
these calculations, 9 features of each estimator (3 channels 3
details) were generated for each Coiflets wavelet. These
features were numerically represented in a format that is
suitable for use with SVMs and NNs algorithms [35, 36] as
described in the next section.
V. MACHINE LEARNING
SVMs and NNs learning algorithms were used in [13, 14,
22, 23, 37] and provided excellent classification performances.
A detailed description of SVMs and NNs can be found in[36].
The MATLAB NN toolbox was used for all the training and
testing experiments. The training experiments were handled
with the aid of the back-propagation learning algorithm [38].

Fig. 4. The Hybrid Machine Learning System

At each specific number of hidden layers (or a specific

degree-gamma pair), 80% of the samples (9600 events) were
randomly selected and used for training and the remaining
20%for testing. This process was repeated 10 times, and in
each time the datasets were randomly mixed. For each specific
configuration, the average accuracy was calculated for the ten
training-testing pairs.

SVM experiments were carried out using the MySVM

software[39]. SVM can be performed with different kernels
and most of them were reported to provide similar results for
similar applications [6]. So, the Anova-Kernel SVM was used
in this work.
As shown on Fig. 4, NNs and SVMs classifiers were
created with 9 inputs, representing features of one estimator.
The SVM classifier has one output node representing the target
function: closed eyes/opened eyes. The NN classifier has one
output node that has five possible classes: opened eyes, left fist,
right fist, both fists, and both feet. Both classifiers were
integrated such that the NN classifier is only enabled when the
eyes are open.

A huge number of training and testing experiments were

carried out. Table I and Table II list the best average accuracies
with their associated classifier configurations. It can be noted
that the use of a SVMs classifier of gamma = 9 and degree = 6
with inputs that were generated by a Coif4 wavelet and MAV
features provided the optimum classification performance of an
accuracy of 74.97%. In addition, a NNs classifier of 15 hidden
layers with inputs that were generated by a Coif2 wavelet and
IEEG features provided an accuracy of 71.6%. These are very
promising results as they were obtained while most of the
available data are for imagined movements.

In SVM, each of the degree and gamma parameters were

varied from 1 to 10 and the number of hidden layers for the
neural network was varied from 1 to 20.
TABLE I.
Features

OPTIMUM CLASSIFICATION RESULTS ACHIEVED USING D IFFERENT COIFLETSWAVELETS WITH SVMS .

MAV

RMS

AAC

IEEG

SSI

VAR

Coiflets wavelet gam deg AvgAcc gam deg AvgAcc gam deg AvgAcc gam deg AvgAcc gam deg AvgAcc gam deg AvgAcc
Coif1

0.7011

0.6911

0.6821

0.6930

0.6183

0.6011

Coif2

0.6903

0.6857

0.6532

0.6814

0.6634

0.6122

Coif3

0.7152

0.7033

0.6642

0.6598

0.6120

0.5984

Coif4

0.7497

0.7112

0.6803

0.6786

0.6045

0.6103

Coif5

0.7325

0.7058

0.6792

0.6133

0.6143

0.6002

TABLE II.

OPTIMUM CLASSIFICATION RESULTS ACHIEVED USING D IFFERENT COIFLETSWAVELETS WITH N NS.

Features

MAV

RMS

AAC

IEEG

SSI

VAR

Coiflets wavelet

HL

AvgAcc

HL

AvgAcc

HL

AvgAcc

HL

AvgAcc

HL

AvgAcc

HL

AvgAcc

Coif1

16

0.6166

14

0.6186

17

0.5801

19

0.6612

19

0.6247

13

0.5781

Coif2

20

0.6470

19

0.6430

13

0.5821

15

0.7160

19

0.5862

12

0.5801

Coif3

16

0.5882

19

0.6349

18

0.5923

20

0.6207

13

0.5578

18

0.6491

Coif4

16

0.5984

16

0.6186

19

0.6045

18

0.6065

0.5538

15

0.5538

Coif5

11

0.6247

18

0.6045

20

0.5984

19

0.6227

13

0.5335

17

0.5396

VI.

REAL TIME IMPLEMENTATION

A simple software interface was designed as show in Fig. 5.

This software reads streams of EEG signals from a test EEG
record or from an EEG mouse (if available).

The system extracts the features needed for the SVM and
NN decision rules and provides near-real time actions. The
default configurations of this system are to translate the
closing eyes for 2s activity into a mouse click and the

196 | P a g e
www.ijacsa.thesai.org

(IJACSA) International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications,

Vol. 5, No. 4, 2014

imagined left/right fists, both fists, and both feet movements

into computer cursor movements as seen in Fig. 6. These
configurations can be reprogrammed to run different computer
applications instead of simple cursor movements.

[1]

[2]

[3]
[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

Fig. 5. EEG Mouse Control Panel

[9]
[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]

[14]

[15]
[16]
Fig. 6. The Suggested Real-Time Implementation of the System

VII. CONCLUSIONS
The objective of this work was to enable the use of the
available commercial EEG headsets as a remote control for
computer applications. Disabled people may use this system as
a channel of communication with computers and they can
provide some simple computer commands by imagination.
Signal records obtained from the PhysioNet EEG dataset were
analyzed using the Coiflets wavelets and machine learning
algorithms and promising classification performances were
obtained.

[17]

[18]

[19]

REFERENCES
J. P. Donoghue, "Connecting cortex to machines: recent advances in
brain interfaces," Nature Neuroscience Supplement, vol. 5, pp. 1085
1088, 2002.
S. Levine, J. Huggins, S. BeMent, R. Kushwaha, L. Schuh, E. Passaro,
M. Rohde, and D. Ross, "Identification of electrocorticogram patterns as
the basis for a direct brain interface," Journal of Clinical
Neurophysiology, vol. 16, pp. 439-447, 1999.
A. Vallabhaneni, T. Wang, and B. He, "BrainComputer Interface," in
Neural Engineering, B. He, Ed.: Springer US, 2005, pp. 85-121.
[4] J. Wolpaw, N. Birbaumer, D. McFarland, G. Pfurtscheller, and T.
Vaughan, "Brain-computer interfaces for communication and control,"
Clinical Neurophysiology, vol. 113, pp. 767-791, 2002.
E. Niedermeyer and F. H. L. da Silva, Electroencephalography: Basic
Principles, Clinical Applications, and Related Fields: Lippincott
Williams & Wilkins, 2005.
J. Sleight, P. Pillai, and S. Mohan, "Classification of Executed and
Imagined Motor Movement EEG Signals," Ann Arbor: University of
Michigan, 2009, pp. 1-10.
B. Graimann, G. Pfurtscheller, and B. Allison, "Brain-Computer
Interfaces: A Gentle Introduction," in Brain-Computer Interfaces:
Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2010, pp. 1-27.
A. E. Selim, M. A. Wahed, and Y. M. Kadah, "Machine Learning
Methodologies in Brain-Computer Interface Systems," in Biomedical
Engineering Conference, 2008. CIBEC 2008. Cairo International, 2008,
pp. 1-5.
E. Grabianowski, "How Brain-computer Interfaces Work,"
HowStuffWorks, Inc, 2007.
M. Smith, G. Salvendy, K. R. Mller, M. Krauledat, G. Dornhege, G.
Curio, and B. Blankertz, "Machine Learning and Applications for BrainComputer Interfacing," in Human Interface and the Management of
Information. Methods, Techniques and Tools in Information Design. vol.
4557: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2007, pp. 705-714.
M. H. Alomari, E. A. Awada, A. Samaha, and K. Alkamha, "WaveletBased Feature Extraction for the Analysis of EEG Signals Associated
with Imagined Fists and Feet Movements," Computer and Information
Science, vol. 7, pp. 17-27, 2014.
M. H. Alomari, E. A. Awada, and O. Younis, "Subject-Independent
EEG-Based Discrimination Between Imagined and Executed, Right and
Left Fists Movements," European Journal of Scientific Research, vol.
118, pp. 364-373, 2014.
M. H. Alomari, A. Samaha, and K. AlKamha, "Automated Classification
of L/R Hand Movement EEG Signals using Advanced Feature
Extraction and Machine Learning," International Journal of Advanced
Computer Science and Applications, vol. 4, pp. 207-212, 2013.
G. Pfurtscheller, C. Neuper, D. Flotzinger, and M. Pregenzer, "EEGbased discrimination between imagination of right and left hand
movement," Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, vol.
103, pp. 642-651, 1997.
F. Sepulveda, "Brain-Actuated Control of Robot Navigation," in
Advances in Robot Navigation, A. Barrera, Ed.: InTech, 2011.
A.-K. Mohamed, "Towards improved EEG interpretation in a
sensorimotor BCI for the control of a prosthetic or orthotic hand," in
Faculty of Engineering. vol. Thesis: Master of Science in Engineering
Johannesburg:
University
of
Witwatersrand,
2011,
p.
http://hdl.handle.net/10539/10546.
D. Farina, O. F. d. Nascimento, M.-F. Lucas, and C. Doncarli,
"Optimization of wavelets for classification of movement-related
cortical potentials generated by variation of force-related parameters,"
Journal of Neuroscience Methods, vol. 162, pp. 357-363, 5/15/ 2007.
J. A. Kim, D. U. Hwang, S. Y. Cho, and S. K. Han, "Single trial
discrimination between right and left hand movement with EEG signal,"
in Proceedings of the 25th Annual International Conference of the IEEE
Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, Cancun, Mexico, 2003,
pp. 3321-3324 Vol.4.
Y. Wang, B. Hong, X. Gao, and S. Gao, "Implementation of a BrainComputer Interface Based on Three States of Motor Imagery," in 29th

197 | P a g e
www.ijacsa.thesai.org

(IJACSA) International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications,

Vol. 5, No. 4, 2014

[20]

[21]

[22]

[23]

[24]
[25]

[26]

[27]

[28]

[29]

Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine

and Biology Society, 2007. EMBS 2007., 2007, pp. 5059-5062.
C. Guger, W. Harkam, C. Hertnaes, and G. Pfurtscheller, "Prosthetic
Control by an EEG-based Brain- Computer Interface (BCI)," in AAATE
5th European Conference for the Advancement of Assistive Technology,
Dsseldorf, Germany, 1999.
Y. Su, Y. Qi, J.-x. Luo, B. Wu, F. Yang, Y. Li, Y.-t. Zhuang, X.-x.
Zheng, and W.-d. Chen, "A hybrid brain-computer interface control
strategy in a virtual environment," Journal of Zhejiang University
SCIENCE C, vol. 12, pp. 351-361, 2011.
I. Homri, S. Yacoub, and N. Ellouze, "Optimal segments selection for
EEG classification," in 6th International Conference on Sciences of
Electronics, Technologies of Information and Telecommunications
(SETIT), Sousse, Tunisia, 2012, pp. 817-821.
M. Toli and F. Jovi, "Classification of Wavelet Transformed EEG
Signals with Neural Network for Imagined Mental and Motor Tasks,"
International Journal of Fundamental and Applied Kinesiology, vol. 45,
pp. 130-138, 2013.
NeuroSky, "MindWave Mobile: MyndPlay Bundle," in EEG Biosensor
Solutions: http://neurosky.com/products-markets/eeg-biosensors, 2014.
A. L. Goldberger, L. A. N. Amaral, L. Glass, J. M. Hausdorff, P. C.
Ivanov, R. G. Mark, J. E. Mietus, G. B. Moody, C.-K. Peng, and H. E.
Stanley, "PhysioBank, PhysioToolkit, and PhysioNet: Components of a
New Research Resource for Complex Physiologic Signals," Circulation,
vol. 101, pp. e215-e220, June 13, 2000 2000.
L. Deecke, H. Weinberg, and P. Brickett, "Magnetic fields of the human
brain accompanying voluntary movements: Bereitschaftsmagnetfeld,"
Experimental Brain Research, vol. 48, pp. 144-148, 1982.
C. Neuper and G. Pfurtscheller, "Evidence for distinct beta resonance
frequencies in human EEG related to specific sensorimotor cortical
areas," Clinical Neurophysiology, vol. 112, pp. 2084-2097, 2001.
R. Romo-Vazquez, R. Ranta, V. Louis-Dorr, and D. Maquin, "EEG
Ocular Artefacts and Noise Removal," in 29th Annual International
Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society,
EMBS 2007. , Lyon, 2007, pp. 5445-5448.
G. Bartels, S. Li-Chen, and L. Bao-Liang, "Automatic artifact removal

[30]

[31]

[32]

[33]

[34]

[35]

[36]

[37]

[38]

[39]

from EEG - a mixed approach based on double blind source separation

and support vector machine," in 2010 Annual International Conference
of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC),
2010, pp. 5383-5386.
G. Gmez-Herrero, "Automatic Artifact Removal (AAR) toolbox for
MATLAB," in Transform methods for Electroencephalography (EEG):
http://kasku.org/projects/eeg/aar.htm, 2008.
S. Tuntisak and S. Premrudeepreechacharn, "Harmonic Detection in
Distribution Systems Using Wavelet Transform and Support Vector
Machine," in 2007 IEEE Lausanne Power Tech, Lausanne, 2007, pp.
1540-1545.
L. Qingyang and S. Zhe, "Method of Harmonic Detection Based On the
Wavelet Transform," in International Conference on Information and
Computer Applications (ICICA), Hong Kong, 2012, pp. 213-217.
A. Phinyomark, C. Limsakul, and P. Phukpattaranont, "Optimal Wavelet
Functions in Wavelet Denoising for Multifunction Myoelectric Control,"
ECTI Transactions on Electrical Eng., Electronics, and Communications,
vol. 8, pp. 43-52, 2010.
A. Phinyomark, F. Quaine, Y. Laurillau, S. Thongpanja, C. Limsakul,
and P. Phukpattaranont, "EMG Amplitude Estimators Based on
Probability Distribution for Muscle-Computer Interface," Fluctuation
and Noise Letters, vol. 12, p. 1350016, 2013.
M. Al-Omari, R. Qahwaji, T. Colak, and S. Ipson, "Machine learningbased investigation of the associations between cmes and filaments,"
Solar Physics, vol. 262, pp. 511-539, 2010.
R. Qahwaji, T. Colak, M. Al-Omari, and S. Ipson, "Automated
Prediction of CMEs Using Machine Learning of CMEFlare
Associations," Sol. Phys, vol. 248, pp. 471-483 2008.
P. A. Kharat and S. V. Dudul, "Daubechies Wavelet Neural Network
Classifier for the Diagnosis of Epilepsy," Wseas Transactions on
Biology and Biomedicine, vol. 9, pp. 103-113, 2012.
S. E. Fahlmann and C. Lebiere, "The cascade-correlation learning
architecture," in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 2
(NIPS-2) Denver, Colorado, 1989.
S. Rping, "mySVM-Manual ": University of Dortmund, Lehrstuhl
Informatik 8, 2000.

198 | P a g e
www.ijacsa.thesai.org