TY - GEN
T1 - Individual hand motion classification through EMG pattern recognition
T2 - 21st Symposium on Signal Processing, Images and Artificial Vision, STSIVA 2016
AU - Castiblanco, Carolina
AU - Parra, Carlos
AU - Colorado, Julian
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2016 IEEE.
PY - 2016/11/14
Y1 - 2016/11/14
N2 - The EMG signals are being used in electronic systems with biofeedback control for tracking and classifying of hand motion. These systems present a challenge in identifying the movement due to the variation of the EMG signals between subjects, therefore different pattern recognition techniques have been implemented to overcome this challenge. In response to the previous problem, the present study compares the performance of both K - means and SVM methods to identify five individual movements of the hand. Therefore two techniques of classification were implemented, the first one consist of classifying the movements individually. while the second classifies all five movements through technic based on decision trees. Also this paper analyses the influence of the signal normalization over the performance of the classification. In general, SVM classifier performed better against K - means in the two tests with the error percentage below 9%.
AB - The EMG signals are being used in electronic systems with biofeedback control for tracking and classifying of hand motion. These systems present a challenge in identifying the movement due to the variation of the EMG signals between subjects, therefore different pattern recognition techniques have been implemented to overcome this challenge. In response to the previous problem, the present study compares the performance of both K - means and SVM methods to identify five individual movements of the hand. Therefore two techniques of classification were implemented, the first one consist of classifying the movements individually. while the second classifies all five movements through technic based on decision trees. Also this paper analyses the influence of the signal normalization over the performance of the classification. In general, SVM classifier performed better against K - means in the two tests with the error percentage below 9%.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85002896849&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1109/STSIVA.2016.7743339
DO - 10.1109/STSIVA.2016.7743339
M3 - Conference contribution
AN - SCOPUS:85002896849
T3 - 2016 21st Symposium on Signal Processing, Images and Artificial Vision, STSIVA 2016
BT - 2016 21st Symposium on Signal Processing, Images and Artificial Vision, STSIVA 2016
A2 - Altuve, Miguel
PB - Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc.
Y2 - 30 August 2016 through 2 September 2016
ER -