Abstract

This work performs the metrological comparison of two groups of indicators estimating the average level of EEG–potentials. The indirect spectral indicators (ISI) based on amplitude spectrum and power spectrum are contrasted with natural indicators (NI) based on period-amplitude analysis, on EEG absolute value and on EEG envelope. Five major results were obtained: 1) NI give almost equivalent estimates that differ from ISI significantly; 2) NI demonstrate smooth dynamics of their value change at successive epochs whereas ISI are subject to drastic and casual fluctuations; 3) ISI unlike NI do not possess the additivity property of statistical averaging, their estimates depending on number and length of averaged epochs can differ over 3 times in their values; 4) ISI at simulated signals with a known amplitude ratio give estimates that differ 1.4–1.55 times from true value whereas NI show the proper estimates; 5) ISI depending on differences between EEG spectral distribution give estimates which differ over 5 times in their ratios while NI show the same ratios which differ 1.38–3.7 times from ISI. The least reliable results in all comparisons are related to the power spectrum. These conclusions do not allow to qualify metrologically ISI as an analytical tool that is adequate for the nature and peculiarities of EEG potentials. Their use may lead to incompatibility of the results obtained by different researchers and clinicians.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call