Next Article in Journal
Incremental Learning of Human Activities in Smart Homes
Next Article in Special Issue
Machine Learning Techniques for Arousal Classification from Electrodermal Activity: A Systematic Review
Previous Article in Journal
Small Ultrasound-Based Corrosion Sensor for Intraday Corrosion Rate Estimation
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

A Novel Application of Deep Learning (Convolutional Neural Network) for Traumatic Spinal Cord Injury Classification Using Automatically Learned Features of EMG Signal

1
School of Engineering, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON N1G 2W1, Canada
2
The Department of Biomedical Engineering, Al-Khwarizmi College of Engineering, Baghdad University, Baghdad 10071, Iraq
3
The Wisconsin National Primate Research Center, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI 53715, USA
4
The Division of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON L8S 4L8, Canada
5
The Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Hamilton Health Sciences, St Joseph’s Hamilton Healthcare, Hamilton, ON L8N 4A6, Canada
6
The Lafayette Bone and Joint Clinic, Lafayette, LA 70508, USA
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sensors 2022, 22(21), 8455; https://doi.org/10.3390/s22218455
Submission received: 28 September 2022 / Revised: 25 October 2022 / Accepted: 1 November 2022 / Published: 3 November 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Biomedical Sensors-Recent Advances and Future Challenges 2022)

Abstract

:
In this study, a traumatic spinal cord injury (TSCI) classification system is proposed using a convolutional neural network (CNN) technique with automatically learned features from electromyography (EMG) signals for a non-human primate (NHP) model. A comparison between the proposed classification system and a classical classification method (k-nearest neighbors, kNN) is also presented. Developing such an NHP model with a suitable assessment tool (i.e., classifier) is a crucial step in detecting the effect of TSCI using EMG, which is expected to be essential in the evaluation of the efficacy of new TSCI treatments. Intramuscular EMG data were collected from an agonist/antagonist tail muscle pair for the pre- and post-spinal cord lesion from five Macaca fasicularis monkeys. The proposed classifier is based on a CNN using filtered segmented EMG signals from the pre- and post-lesion periods as inputs, while the kNN is designed using four hand-crafted EMG features. The results suggest that the CNN provides a promising classification technique for TSCI, compared to conventional machine learning classification. The kNN with hand-crafted EMG features classified the pre- and post-lesion EMG data with an F-measure of 89.7% and 92.7% for the left- and right-side muscles, respectively, while the CNN with the EMG segments classified the data with an F-measure of 89.8% and 96.9% for the left- and right-side muscles, respectively. Finally, the proposed deep learning classification model (CNN), with its learning ability of high-level features using EMG segments as inputs, shows high potential and promising results for use as a TSCI classification system. Future studies can confirm this finding by considering more subjects.

1. Introduction

Traumatic spinal cord injuries (TSCI) comprise a serious public health burden. Worldwide, it has been estimated that there are approximately 930,000 new cases a year, and approximately 27 million people are currently living with TSCI [1]. Common causes include motor vehicle crashes, sports injuries, falls, and interpersonal violence [2]. Patients may experience a plethora of clinical deficits, which can be attributed to the injury of specific fiber tracts [3]. Typical symptoms include limb weakness and sensory abnormalities, in addition to bowel and bladder dysfunction [4]. TSCI has a devastating effect on the physical, psychosocial, and emotional aspects of the patient and the caregivers [2]. Although rehabilitation treatments have positively impacted patient independence, there exist limited pharmacological approaches to mediate improvements in volitional limb control [4]. In this context, the development of a valid non-human primate (NHP) model of TSCI with an efficient assessment tool may assist in the identification and evaluation of candidate therapeutic agents for this condition [4].
Electromyography (EMG) signals are bioelectrical signals generated from muscle fibers during muscle contractions [5]. Skeletal muscle is composed of densely packed muscle fibers innervated by motor neurons [6]. The motor fibers subtended by one motor neuron are considered a motor unit (MU). Each muscle consists of multiple MUs, which act in a graded and coordinated manner to generate a functional muscle contraction. To increase or maintain the generated force of a muscle, the MUs fire repeatedly and generate a motor unit potential train (MUPT). A detected EMG signal is composed of the superposition of the generated MUPTs of all fired MUs and any accompanying interference signal, such as background noise [7,8,9].
EMG signals were initially analyzed based on a number of spikes in the aggregate signal [4], followed by more sophisticated approaches, such as those based on wavelet analysis [10] and machine learning [11]. Consequently, in the present work, we propose a new TSCI classification system using raw EMG segments and deep learning (DL) classification through the use of a convolutional neural network (CNN). Moreover, a comparison between the proposed classification system and a classical machine learning (ML) classification technique—k-nearest neighbors (kNN)—is presented.
Despite the valuable information included in the recorded EMG signal, its complex and non-stationary nature makes the process of extracting relevant features a challenging task, particularly for a dynamic free muscle activity with different levels of contractions. Recent advances in the AI field—particularly DL techniques—may help to overcome this issue and promote new classification approaches. DL techniques are unique, in terms of their learning ability for high-level features, which eliminates the need for the challenging feature extraction process. Another key factor that makes DL more popular is the ability to be used even with complex, wide, and unstructured data [12,13]. Although growing attention has been given to the DL techniques, including CNNs, autoencoders (AEs), and recurrent neural networks (RNNs) in the EMG motor control area, to the best of our knowledge, the EMG-based classification system for neuromuscular disease is still a new application, which has not been investigated previously. Therefore, it seems reasonable to start investigating this type of learning style and compare it to conventional machine learning techniques that have been studied extensively in the literature. CNN has been used as a successful tool in various EMG motor control studies, achieving competitive results compared to other machine learning classification techniques. Table 1 summarizes the most recent applications of deep learning in the EMG classification field.
The overall objective of this research program is to design a valid NHP model of TSCI with two goals: (1) measuring the initial impairment associated with an experimentally created spinal cord lesion, and (2) measuring natural recovery without treatment and recovery with treatment. This impairment was measured with respect to electromyographic signals obtained from muscles affected by the experimental spinal cord injury. Stated in another way, the EMG can be considered a neurophysiological biomarker. This paper presents the results and analysis investigating the first goal using EMG signals with two different classification techniques (kNN and CNN).

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. EMG Acquisition Setup and Protocol

The experimental methods were as described in detail elsewhere [3,4,10,11,24]. Briefly, the subjects were adult Macaca fasicularis monkeys. All procedures were completed with a sterile technique and under anesthesia. A transmitter was inserted, which recorded the EMG signal from the tail’s left and right flexor cauda longus and brevis muscles. An experimental spinal cord lesion was created using an epidural catheter. The applied protocol in this experiment was approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) at Harvard University and the University of Wisconsin at Madison. This study represents a novel analysis of the data utilizing a deep learning approach.

2.2. EMG Data Analysis

2.2.1. EMG Data Pre-Processing

In this section, the recorded raw EMG signals were filtered using a bandpass filter (fourth-order Butterworth filter with lower and upper cut-off frequencies of 10 and 450 Hz, respectively). Another filtering stage was implemented on the data using a notch filter at 60 Hz, in order to eliminate the power line noise. Additionally, the input signal was processed forward and backward, in order to resolve phase shift problems. The EMG signal conditioning phase was implemented using MATLAB software (MathWorks, Natick, MA, USA).
The filtered EMG signal for each individual day of the experiment was segmented into a series of disjoint windows of size 1000 ms. A different number of EMG segments were then tested as inputs to the classification system. After multiple trials, 53,350 pre-lesion EMG segments and 135,300 post-lesion EMG segments, combined for all the subjects, were chosen to be used as classifier inputs. This number was selected as a compromise between the improvement in the classification accuracy and the time consumed. According to the nature of the experiment, the collected data were imbalanced, as they were collected for more days during the post-lesion period (90 days), compared to the pre-lesion period (30 days). An imbalanced data set can lead to inaccurate classification results [25]. To address this problem, the data set was balanced by applying the random over-sampling technique in the pre-lesion class. The samples of the balanced data set were normalized between 0 and 1 using min–max normalization, followed by splitting into training and test sets in an 80:20 split.

2.2.2. Classification Techniques

Two different styles of classification techniques were employed for comparison. These techniques are as follows:

kNN Classification

kNN is a supervised, non-parametric machine learning classification approach. It is a simple and practical algorithm which can be employed for classification and regression tasks [26]. kNN has been used widely in the EMG research area, and its efficiency has been proven in many EMG classification applications [27,28,29,30].
Four of the standard EMG amplitude features were extracted from the prepared EMG segments, including the area, the root mean square (RMS), the turn number, and the zero-crossing number. All features were then standardized and normalized. The created feature vector was then utilized as an input to the kNN classifier. Different k values were tested, and the best accuracy was obtained when using k = 9.

CNN Classification

I.
The Main Layers of CNN
A CNN consists of multiple structural layers of various types, where the three main types of layers are as follows [31,32]:
Convolutional layer: This is an essential component of any CNN. It includes linear and non-linear operations (convolutional and activation functions). The convolutional layer comprises a specific number of filters (kernels) that are applied to the input data. These filters work as detectors to extract different features of the input data. Each filter convolves with input data elements (e.g., image: pixels, signal: data points) by shifting it horizontally and vertically a certain number of steps (known as the stride). All outputs from the convolution step are then combined into one volume, which is known as a feature map. Next, a non-linear function (usually a rectified linear unit, ReLU) is applied to the created feature maps. The ReLU function has been shown to be useful in solving the vanishing gradient problem during the back-propagation process [33], which helps in reducing the training time. Then, to reduce the size of the extracted feature maps, pooling operations are applied using different types of operations (Max, Sum, Average). Finally, the final convolutional layer output passes through a flatten operation to transform it into one vector, to be used later as input to the fully connected layer. The CNN is trained in a supervised manner, and the filters (kernels) are learned automatically during the training process of the CNN. The hyperparameters related to the kernels, such as their size, number, padding, and stride, need to be designed before the CNN training process.
Fully connected layer: This is a fully connected feed-forward neural network that consists of a vector of neurons that are connected to all the neurons in the next layer through learnable weights. It receives the output of the flattening step, which is the last pooling step of the last convolutional layer.
Output layer: This includes an activation function, which is selected according to the type of classification task (e.g., binary classification: Sigmoid function, multiple class classification: Softmax function, continuous value regression: Linear function)
II.
The Proposed CNN Architecture
In this work, the CNN architecture was chosen empirically by running multiple experiments with different architectures considering various numbers of layers and filters with different sizes and strides.
The final selected network consisted of five blocks, as illustrated in Figure 1 and Table 2. The CNN was structured as follows:
Input: An EMG segment (1000 × 1)
Block 1 was composed of:
-
A convolutional layer with 32 filters having a size 5 × 1 and a stride of 2;
-
An activation layer using rectified linear units (ReLUs) as activation functions;
-
A sub-sampling layer (max-pooling).
Block 2 was composed of:
-
A convolutional layer with 32 filters having a size of 5 × 1 and a stride of 2;
-
An activation layer of ReLUs used as activation functions;
-
A sub-sampling layer (max-pooling).
Block 3 was composed of:
-
A convolutional layer with 64 filters having a size of 3 × 1 and a stride of 1;
-
An activation layer of ReLUs used as activation functions;
-
A sub-sampling layer (max-pooling), where a dropout of 0.1 was applied.
Block 4 was composed of:
-
A convolutional layer with 128 filters having a size of 3 × 1 and a stride of 1;
-
An activation layer of ReLUs used as activation functions;
-
A sub-sampling layer (max-pooling), where a dropout of 0.1 was applied.
These four blocks were followed by:
A global average pooling layer (GAP), which computes the average value of each individual input feature map and yields a single feature map, obtained by concatenating the computed average values.
A fully connected layer (FC) of size 100 × 1, with ReLUs as activation functions.
An output layer, in which the sigmoid activation function was chosen to satisfy the binary classification requirement. This was used to classify the input data using the output from the FC layer into either the pre-lesion class (<0.5) or post-lesion class (>0.5).

3. Results and Discussion

The results of the classification comparison analysis are as follows:

3.1. CNN Hyperparameters

To design a neural network, certain variables need to be set before optimizing the network weights. These variables are known as network hyperparameters, and include variables such as the number of layers, the number of nodes, the learning rate, the batch size, and the number of epochs. We applied a manual search method to find the combination of hyperparameters that provided the best classification performance. Various combinations of the hyperparameters were evaluated, and the best combination was selected to perform the classification task. The hyperparameters were optimized using training and test sets, and the final results are reported using five-fold cross validation. The same procedure was applied to the EMG data for the right and left sides. Table 3 summarizes the selected hyperparameters.
The network was trained using the extracted EMG segments, along with their corresponding class labels (pre-lesion = Class 0, post-lesion = Class 1). The binary cross-entropy (BC) loss function was used, as shown in the following equation:
BC = 1 n i = 1 n x i   .   log y i + 1 x i . log 1 y i ,
where yi is the predicted probability, xi is the actual probability (0 or 1), and n is the total number of instances. All the experiments were conducted using a free cloud service based on Jupyter Notebooks, known as Google Colaboratory (Colab), which has been shown to be an effective tool for deep learning [34]. The CNN was implemented in Keras (a Python front-end for deep learning) [35], and the Python Tensorflow library [36] was used for the computational implementations.

3.2. CNN Over-Fitting

Over-fitting is a common problem in machine learning, which occurs when the model is too complex and fits the training data very well (memorizing the data). To test the performance of the proposed CNN classifier, the loss and the accuracy curves were visualized for both sides, when trained using 80% of the EMG segments and tested using 20% of the segments. Figure 2, Figure 3, Figure 4 and Figure 5 show the accuracy and the loss curves of the CNN for the left and right sides. In these figures, both the training and testing loss decreased continuously, and were close throughout the training process, which indicated that the proposed CNN did not face an over-fitting problem.

3.3. Performance Metrics of kNN and CNN Classification

The major goal of biological system statistical analysis is to obtain inference regarding the data generalization process by creating a mathematical model. Such a model will help in confirming previous biological knowledge about the studied system, as well as offering a suitable tool to test different hypotheses regarding the system behavior. Generally, statistical analysis requires data collected through controlled experiment design and a small–moderate sample size (compared to ML). Consequently, the statistical results and inferences would be more complex and less precise when dealing with complex and wide data [12]. On the other hand, artificial intelligence (AI) analysis (i.e., ML or DL) aims mainly to generate a prediction about unseen (unobserved) data, or to make a prediction about future behavior without requiring an understanding of the underlying mechanism (e.g., identifying the best course of treatment) [12]. AI analysis can be effective even with an unstructured data set collected in uncontrolled experiment settings, or data characterized by a complicated non-linear nature. AI techniques, including ML and DL, make minimal assumptions regarding the data generating system [12]. Hence, the classification techniques that were implemented in this study (CNN and kNN) might be a more suitable choice for developing a reliable assessment tool (automatic identification) [13] of TSCI using EMG signals.
Figure 6 and Figure 7 show the five statistical metrics calculated for the kNN and CNN classifications of the EMG data for the muscles of the left and right sides, separately.
According to these figures, the kNN classified the EMG data with an F-measure of 89.7% for the left side and 92.7% for the right side. The simple proposed architecture of the CNN also performed reliably, as it achieved a higher F-measure of 89.8% and 96.9% for the left and right sides, respectively. The CNN model achieved a competitive result for all of the evaluation metrics for both sides. This can be explained by the advantage that the CNN has, in terms of its ability to use the temporal correlation existing inside the EMG segments. These results might also indicate that CNN had learned the required information from the EMG signal, reflecting the effect of the created lesions on the muscle activity. These unique EMG features were learned through the successive convolutional layers.
Therefore, such a type of learning system might help in interpreting the complex neural signals between the motor control system and the skeletal muscles, recorded as EMG signals. It may also help to characterize the neuromuscular abnormalities (i.e., perturbations in the electrical activity of the muscle) that occur as a result of neuromuscular diseases, including TSCI. Electromyography is a reliable and cost-efficient muscle activity assessment tool; however, due to the complex process of generating this signal, analyzing and understanding such a complicated signal is a challenging task. Notably, in this project, the EMG signal presented higher complexity as it was collected while the subjects were performing their daily activities without any restrictions (freestyle movement). The TSCI classification system could be applied in future work using a CNN system with a more advanced structure.

4. Conclusions

This study presented a new application of deep learning (CNN) as a TSCI classification system, and compared the results obtained with the proposed model with those of a classical machine learning classifier (kNN). The CNN classification system was employed using EMG segments as inputs, while the kNN was applied using four EMG hand-crafted features (i.e., area, RMS, turn number, and zero-crossing number). The performance of the two classifiers was measured and compared according to five performance metrics (accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, precision, and F-measure). From the obtained results, we found that the proposed CNN technique with automatically learned features achieved a competitive degree of classification accuracy, when compared to the classical kNN classifier. As the CNN technique is still a new application, more investigations need to be performed in order to obtain a clear understanding of the ability and reliability of such a deep learning technique. The work contributes to the literature and will help researchers learn about the effect of implementing the CNN for such a TSCI data set.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, F.M., H.A.A., S.N. and J.B.S.; Methodology, F.M., M.S. and D.M.; Data Acquisition, K.B., H.A.S., D.R.S. and S.N.; Writing—original draft preparation, F.M., M.S., S.N. and H.A.A.; Writing—review and editing, F.M., M.S., S.N. and H.A.A.; Project administration, H.A.S., K.B. and S.N.; Funding acquisition, S.N. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded in part by the Office of The Director, National Institutes of Health, under Award Number P51OD011106 to the Wisconsin National Primate Research Center, University of Wisconsin-Madison. This research was conducted in part at a facility constructed with support from Research Facilities Improvement Program grant numbers RR15459-01 and RR020141-01. The New England Primate Research Center was the recipient of NIH Grant 5P51RR000168. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The research was approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) at Harvard University and the University of Wisconsin at Madison.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable as all the subjects were animals.

Data Availability Statement

The data is continuing to be analyzed by the research team and is currently not publicly available.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. James, S.L.; Theadom, A.; Ellenbogen, R.G.; Bannick, M.S.; Montjoy-Venning, W.; Lucchesi, L.R.; Abbasi, N.; Abdulkader, R.; Abraha, H.N.; Adsuar, J.C.; et al. Global, regional, and national burden of traumatic brain injury and spinal cord injury, 1990–2016: A systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016. Lancet Neurol. 2019, 18, 56–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  2. National Spinal Cord Injury Statistical Center, Facts and Figures at a Glance; University of Alabama at Birmingham: Birmingham, AL, USA, 2018.
  3. Sledge, J.; Graham, W.A.; Westmoreland, S.; Sejdic, E.; Miller, A.; Hoggatt, A.; Nesathurai, S. Spinal cord injury models in non human primates: Are lesions created by sharp instruments relevant to human injuries? Med. Hypotheses 2013, 81, 747–748. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Seth, N.; Simmons, H.A.; Masood, F.; Graham, W.A.; Rosene, D.L.; Westmoreland, S.V.; Cummings, S.M.; Gwardjan, B.; Sejdic, E.; Hoggatt, A.F.; et al. Model of Traumatic Spinal Cord Injury for Evaluating Pharmacologic Treatments in Cynomolgus Macaques (Macaca fasicularis). Comp. Med. 2018, 68, 63–73. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  5. Carlson, F.D.; Wilkie, D.R. Muscle Physiology; Prentice-Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA, 1974; Volume 53. [Google Scholar]
  6. Basmajian, J.V. Muscle Alive; The Williams and Wilkins Company: Philadelphia, PA, USA, 1985. [Google Scholar]
  7. Parsaei, H. EMG Signal Decomposition Using Motor Unit Potential Train Validity; University of Watrloo: Waterloo, ON, Canada, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  8. Kamali, T. A Multiple Instance Learning Approach to Electrophysiological Muscle Classification for Diagnosing Neuromuscular Disorders Using Quantitative EMG; University of Watrloo: Waterloo, ON, Canada, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  9. Rasheed, S. A Multiclassifier Approach to Motor Unit Potential Classification for EMG Signal Decomposition; University of Waterloo: Waterloo, ON, Canada, 2006. [Google Scholar]
  10. Masood, F.; Abdullah, H.A.; Seth, N.; Simmons, H.; Brunner, K.; Sejdic, E.; Schalk, D.R.; Graham, W.A.; Hoggatt, A.F.; Rosene, D.L.; et al. Neurophysiological Characterization of a Non-Human Primate Model of Traumatic Spinal Cord Injury Utilizing Fine-Wire EMG Electrodes. Sensors 2019, 19, 3303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  11. Masood, F.; Farzana, M.; Nesathurai, S.; Abdullah, H.A. Comparison study of classification methods of intramuscular electromyography data for non-human primate model of traumatic spinal cord injury. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part H J. Eng. Med. 2020, 234, 955–965. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Bzdok, D.; Altman, N.; Krzywinski, M. Statistics versus machine learning. Nat. Methods 2018, 15, 233–234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Sankar, V.; Kumar, D.; Clausi, D.A.; Taylor, G.W.; Wong, A. SISC: End-to-End Interpretable Discovery Radiomics-Driven Lung Cancer Prediction via Stacked Interpretable Sequencing Cells. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 145444–145454. [Google Scholar]
  14. Liu, X.; Li, H.; Lou, C.; Liang, T.; Liu, X.; Wang, H. A New Approach to Fall Detection Based on Improved Dual Parallel Channels Convolutional Neural Network. Sensors 2019, 19, 12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  15. Too, J.; Abdullah, A.; Saad, N.M.; Ali, N.M.; Zawawi, T.T. Featureless EMG pattern recognition based on convolutional neural network. Indones. J. Electr. Eng. Comput. Sci. 2019, 14, 1291. [Google Scholar]
  16. Hartwell, A.; Kadirkamanathan, V.; Anderson, S.R. Compact Deep Neural Networks for Computationally Efficient Gesture Classification From Electromyography Signals. arXiv 2018, arXiv:1806.08641. [Google Scholar]
  17. Côté-Allard, U.; Fall, C.L.; Drouin, A.; Campeau-Lecours, A.; Gosselin, C.; Glette, K.; Laviolette, F.; Gosselin, B. Deep Learning for Electromyographic Hand Gesture Signal Classification Using Transfer Learning. arXiv 2018, arXiv:1801.07756. [Google Scholar]
  18. Côté-Allard, U.; Fall, C.L.; Campeau-Lecours, A.; Gosselin, C.; Laviolette, F.; Gosselin, B. Transfer Learning for sEMG Hand Gestures Recognition Using Convolutional Neural Network. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC), Banff, AB, Canada, 5–8 October 2017; p. 6. [Google Scholar]
  19. Zhai, X.; Jelfs, B.; Chan, R.H.; Tin, C. Self-Recalibrating Surface EMG Pattern Recognition for Neuroprosthesis Control Based on Convolutional Neural Network. Front. Neurosci. 2017, 11, 379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  20. Du, Y.; Jin, W.; Wei, W.; Hu, Y.; Geng, W. Surface EMG-Based Inter-Session Gesture Recognition Enhanced by Deep Domain Adaptation. Sensors 2017, 17, 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  21. Geng, W.; Du, Y.; Jin, W.; Wei, W.; Hu, Y.; Li, J. Gesture recognition by instantaneous surface EMG images. Sci. Rep. 2016, 6, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  22. Allard, U.C.; Nougarou, F.; Fall, C.L.; Giguère, P.; Gosselin, C.; Laviolette, F.; Gosselin, B. A convolutional neural network for robotic arm guidance using sEMG based frequency-features. In Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), Daejeon, Korea, 9–14 October 2016; pp. 2464–2470. [Google Scholar]
  23. Atzori, M.; Cognolato, M.; Müller, H. Deep Learning with Convolutional Neural Networks Applied to Electromyography Data: A Resource for the Classification of Movements for Prosthetic Hands. Front. Neurorobot. 2016, 10, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  24. Sledge, J.; Mahadevappa, K.; Stacey, P.; Graham, A.; Nesathurai, S. A Speculative Pharmaceutical Cocktail to Treat Spinal Cord Injury. Am. J. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 2016, 95, e108–e110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. López, V.; Fernández, A.; García, S.; Palade, V.; Herrera, F. An insight into classification with imbalanced data: Empirical results and current trends on using data intrinsic characteristics. Inf. Sci. 2013, 250, 113–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Hand, D.J.; Mannila, H.; Smyth, P. Principles of Data Mining; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2001. [Google Scholar]
  27. Küçük, H.; Tepe, C.; Eminoğlu, İ. Classification of EMG signals by k-Nearest Neighbor algorithm and Support vector machine methods. In Proceedings of the 2013 21st Signal Processing and Communications Applications Conference (SIU), Haspolat, Turkey, 24–26 April 2013; pp. 1–4. [Google Scholar]
  28. Al-Faiz, M.Z.; Ali, A.A.; Miry, A.H. A k-nearest neighbor based algorithm for human arm movements recognition using EMG signals. In Proceedings of the 2010 1st International Conference on Energy, Power and Control (EPC-IQ), Basrah, Iraq, 30 November–2 December 2010; pp. 159–167. [Google Scholar]
  29. Wan, B.; Wu, R.; Zhang, K.; Liu, L. A new subtle hand gestures recognition algorithm based on EMG and FSR. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE 21st International Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work in Design (CSCWD), Wellington, New Zealand, 26–28 April 2017; pp. 127–132. [Google Scholar]
  30. Bose, R.; Samanta, K.; Chatterjee, S. Cross-correlation based feature extraction from EMG signals for classification of neuro-muscular diseases. In Proceedings of the 2016 International Conference on Intelligent Control Power and Instrumentation (ICICPI), Kolkata, India, 21–23 October 2016; pp. 241–245. [Google Scholar]
  31. Lawrence, S.; Giles, C.L.; Tsoi, A.C.; Back, A.D. Face recognition: A convolutional neural-network approach. IEEE Trans. Neural Netw. 1997, 8, 98–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  32. Al-Hyari, A.; Szentimrey, H.; Shamli, A.; Martin, T.; Grewal, G.; Areibi, S. A Deep Learning Framework to Predict Routability for FPGA Circuit Placement. In Proceedings of the 2019 29th International Conference on Field Programmable Logic and Applications (FPL), Göteborg, Sweden, 9–13 September 2019; pp. 334–341. [Google Scholar]
  33. Glorot, X.; Bordes, A.; Bengio, Y. Deep Sparse Rectifier Neural Networks. In Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, Ft. Lauderdale, FL, USA, 11–13 April 2011; pp. 315–323. [Google Scholar]
  34. Carneiro, T.; Da Nóbrega, R.V.M.; Nepomuceno, T.; Bian, G.B.; De Albuquerque, V.H.C. Performance Analysis of Google Colaboratory as a Tool for Accelerating Deep Learning Applications. IEEE Access 2018, 6, 61677–61685. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Abadi, M.; Barham, P.; Chen, J.; Chen, Z.; Davis, A.; Dean, J.; Devin, M.; Ghemawat, S.; Irving, G.; Isard, M.; et al. TensorFlow: A system for Large-Scale machine learning. In Proceedings of the 12th USENIX Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation (OSDI 16), Savannah, GA, USA, 2–4 November 2016; pp. 265–283. [Google Scholar]
  36. Abadi, M.; Agarwal, A.; Barham, P.; Brevdo, E.; Chen, Z.; Citro, C.; Corrado, G.S.; Davis, A.; Dean, J.; Devin, M.; et al. TensorFlow: Large-Scale Machine Learning on Heterogeneous Distributed Systems. arXiv 2016, arXiv:1603.04467. [Google Scholar]
Figure 1. Convolutional neural network structure utilized to build the EMG-based TSCI classification system.
Figure 1. Convolutional neural network structure utilized to build the EMG-based TSCI classification system.
Sensors 22 08455 g001
Figure 2. The accuracy curve for the EMG data classification of the left side using the proposed CNN architecture.
Figure 2. The accuracy curve for the EMG data classification of the left side using the proposed CNN architecture.
Sensors 22 08455 g002
Figure 3. The loss curve for the EMG data classification of the left side using the proposed CNN architecture.
Figure 3. The loss curve for the EMG data classification of the left side using the proposed CNN architecture.
Sensors 22 08455 g003
Figure 4. The accuracy curve for the EMG data classification of the right side using the proposed CNN architecture.
Figure 4. The accuracy curve for the EMG data classification of the right side using the proposed CNN architecture.
Sensors 22 08455 g004
Figure 5. The loss curve for the EMG data classification of the right side using the proposed CNN architecture.
Figure 5. The loss curve for the EMG data classification of the right side using the proposed CNN architecture.
Sensors 22 08455 g005
Figure 6. Evaluation metrics of the CNN and kNN classifiers (left side).
Figure 6. Evaluation metrics of the CNN and kNN classifiers (left side).
Sensors 22 08455 g006
Figure 7. Evaluation metrics of the CNN and kNN classifiers (right side).
Figure 7. Evaluation metrics of the CNN and kNN classifiers (right side).
Sensors 22 08455 g007
Table 1. Previous works related to EMG signals and deep learning techniques.
Table 1. Previous works related to EMG signals and deep learning techniques.
#Month/
Year
StudyDL ModelEMG FeatureApplicationConclusion
1June/2019[14]Improved dual parallel channels convolutional neural network (IDPC-CNN).Spectral features of sEMGFall detection using sEMGIDPC-CNN was significantly better than other applied methods
2May/2019[15]CNNSpectrogram imagesPattern recognitionCNN classification accuracy of 88.04%
3August/2018[16]Regression CNNRaw EMG signalSimultaneous EMG
control
CNN-based system outperformed SVM-based system
4August/2018[16]Compact CNNRaw EMG signalGesture classificationCNN outperformed SVM
5January/2019[17]CNN + transfer learningRaw EMG, spectrograms, and continuous wavelet transform (CWT)Gesture classificationTransfer learning enhanced the performance of the CWT-based CNN
6October/2017[18]CNNsEMGGesture recognitionCNN achieved an
average accuracy of 97.81%
7July/2017[19]CNNsEMGPattern recognitionCNN showed a better performance compared to SVM
8February/2017[20]CNNsEMG imagesHand gesture recognitionCNN was better than LDA, SVM, kNN, and RF (state-of-the-art methods)
9November/2016[21]CNNsEMG imagesGesture recognitionCNN was better than LDA, SVM, kNN, MLP and RF
10October/2016[22]CNNsEMG spectrogramsRobotic
arm
guidance
CNN achieved state-of-the-art results
11September/2016[23]CNNRaw sEMGPattern recognitionCNN produced accurate results with a simple architecture, compared to the classical methods
Table 2. Optimized CNN architecture.
Table 2. Optimized CNN architecture.
NoArchitecture ParametersOutput ShapeNo. of Parameters
1CONV1: 32 × (5,1), stride: (2)500 × 32192
2Maxpool1: (2,1), stride: (2)250 × 320
3CONV2: 32 × (5,1), stride: (2)125 × 325152
4Maxpool2: (2,1), stride: (2)63 × 320
5CONV3: 64 × (3,1), stride: (1)63 × 646208
6Maxpool3: (2,1), stride: (2)32 × 640
7Dropout3: (0.1)32 × 640
8CONV4: 128 × (3,1), stride: (1)32 × 12824,704
9Maxpool4: (2,1), stride: (2)16 × 1280
10Dropout4: (0.1)16 × 1280
11Global Average Pooling1280
12FC: 100 (ReLU)10012,900
13Output: 1 (Sigmoid)1101
Total No. of Parameters49,257
Table 3. The utilized hyperparameters.
Table 3. The utilized hyperparameters.
OptimizerLearning RateBatch SizeEpochLoss Function
Adam0.001128500BC
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Masood, F.; Sharma, M.; Mand, D.; Nesathurai, S.; Simmons, H.A.; Brunner, K.; Schalk, D.R.; Sledge, J.B.; Abdullah, H.A. A Novel Application of Deep Learning (Convolutional Neural Network) for Traumatic Spinal Cord Injury Classification Using Automatically Learned Features of EMG Signal. Sensors 2022, 22, 8455. https://doi.org/10.3390/s22218455

AMA Style

Masood F, Sharma M, Mand D, Nesathurai S, Simmons HA, Brunner K, Schalk DR, Sledge JB, Abdullah HA. A Novel Application of Deep Learning (Convolutional Neural Network) for Traumatic Spinal Cord Injury Classification Using Automatically Learned Features of EMG Signal. Sensors. 2022; 22(21):8455. https://doi.org/10.3390/s22218455

Chicago/Turabian Style

Masood, Farah, Milan Sharma, Davleen Mand, Shanker Nesathurai, Heather A. Simmons, Kevin Brunner, Dane R. Schalk, John B. Sledge, and Hussein A. Abdullah. 2022. "A Novel Application of Deep Learning (Convolutional Neural Network) for Traumatic Spinal Cord Injury Classification Using Automatically Learned Features of EMG Signal" Sensors 22, no. 21: 8455. https://doi.org/10.3390/s22218455

APA Style

Masood, F., Sharma, M., Mand, D., Nesathurai, S., Simmons, H. A., Brunner, K., Schalk, D. R., Sledge, J. B., & Abdullah, H. A. (2022). A Novel Application of Deep Learning (Convolutional Neural Network) for Traumatic Spinal Cord Injury Classification Using Automatically Learned Features of EMG Signal. Sensors, 22(21), 8455. https://doi.org/10.3390/s22218455

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop